Re: [Monotone-devel] beginner questions

[Adam Logghe]

While sha-1 hashes may look a bit intimidating, in actually using them
in their short form I don't mind them a bit. I would see the addition of
"fake" version numbers to be a nuisance and likely to me much more
confusing when it counted (when you are trying to work out conflicts in
tree states).

For usability, perhaps you might try to use "selectors" (Section 4.1)? I
find these to be a very nice feature that I turn to frequently...

As some examples from the manual-

address@hidden/2004-04
    Versions written by address@hidden in April 2004.

'address@hidden/2 weeks ago'
    Versions written by address@hidden 2 weeks ago.

graydon/net.venge.monotone.win32/yesterday
    Versions in the net.venge.monotone.win32 branch, written by graydon,
yesterday.

Overall I'm pretty happy with the precision of sha-1 combined with the
fuzziness of selectors.


Adam



joel reed wrote:
> On Fri, May 28, 2004 at 05:15:38PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
>>>Because of the "distributed" part of being a "distributed version
>>>control system".  Say we're using CVSy revision numbers, and we both
>>>check out version 1.1, and make some changes, and commit to our
>>>separate databases.  There's no way for either of us to know about the
>>>other, so presumably we both end up versions named "1.2", except the
>>>actual data in them is different.  This is already confusing.
>>
>>This is true, but Zbigniew's question is a good one - the SHA1 hashes
>>are a big pain to use, and will be forever turning people off.  I know
>>why they're there and what they're for, but I don't like to use them,
>>even in abbreviated form.
>
>
> i would like to add my 2 cents to Jeremy's complaint - this is really
> the only major turn off for me as well. i like monotone a lot but am
> highly concerned with the _usability_ of SHA1 hashes.
>
> jr
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Monotone-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel