Re: Referring to revisions in the git future.

[Alexander Baier]

On 2014-10-29 13:26 Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> think so.  In a more perfect world, I'd go with the easily
>> recognizable and unambiguous IDs.
>
> Actually, if those revids were really mechanically usable, I think that
> would be good enough.  But they're not "easily recognizable".
>
> It's hard to write a regexp that recognizes these without too many false
> positive, and even if you could do it, you'd still need to find out in
> which repository to look it up (when they appear within a file within
> that repository, it can be made to work, but when they appear in an
> email it's much more difficult to link it to the appropriate
> repository).

One could introduce a group/topic parameter that holds a list of
possible repositories to match. If more than one matches, just show all
matches in the tooltip.

Regards,
-- 
Alexander Baier