[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: limits for package name and version (MBF alert: ... .deb filenames)

On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 03:06:39PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> I would like to see policy forbid the use of commit hashes in versions.
> They aren't ordered, and the information about exactly which commit the
> snapshot was can be included in the changelog.

If you use "git describe", removing hashes is a bad idea.

They are needed to identify the version.  Version numbers that are not
unique are worthless.

A small portion of the hash is there only to disambiguate potential
branches, ordering is provided by the number of commits:
0.9.0-a0-283-g1143071 means: tag "0.9.0-a0", with 283 revisions after it,
from a branch whose head's hash starts with 1143071.

If I take revision 282 and apply patch X, while you take the same revision
but apply patch Y instead, we both would have the same version number if
hash is not included.

You can then checkout 0.9.0-a0-283-g1143071 in any repository that has my
commits and you'll get that exact version.  0.9.0-a0-283 doesn't give you

> Mercurial revision numbers should not be used either as they are not
> consistent between repositories (they really were a stupid idea in a
> distributed VCS).

For Mercurial, you're probably right.

Just upgrade to git :p

1KB		// Microsoft corollary to Hanlon's razor:
		//	Never attribute to stupidity what can be
		//	adequately explained by malice.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: