Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: user-friendly hash formats, redux

[Nathaniel Smith]

On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 08:24:57PM +0100, Jerome Fisher wrote:
> I'm not a fan of unstable revision IDs, though nobody seems to complain
> about this in BitKeeper. BitKeeper uses unstable revision IDs and
> stable, global, human-unfriendly keys. The user interface is so focused
> on the former that users are often unaware of the latter (which can be a
> bad thing). Note that the BitKeeper's revision IDs do tend to stabilise
> over time, especially in the common case of having a central,
> authoritative repository that people regularly sync with.

BitKeeper is kind of different, though, isn't it?  Somewhat more like
Arch, in that BK has "repositories" as first-class objects, and you
can talk about them by name and stuff?

Real questions, actually, I've never seen BK in action :-)

-- Nathaniel

-- 
Details are all that matters; God dwells there, and you never get to
see Him if you don't struggle to get them right. -- Stephen Jay Gould