[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Referring to revisions in the git future.
From: |
Stephen J. Turnbull |
Subject: |
Re: Referring to revisions in the git future. |
Date: |
Thu, 30 Oct 2014 14:24:48 +0900 |
Barry Warsaw writes:
> That's the point I'm really trying to make; SHAs are simply terrible to
> communicate between humans.
OK, opinion noted (but mine differs, at least when revnos are offered
as an improvement).
Still, I believe the point is mostly moot. That is, I suspect git
isn't going to give you revnos, at least not out of the box, and
longtime git users aren't going to give them to you even if git can.
- Re: Referring to revisions in the git future, (continued)
- Re: Referring to revisions in the git future, Nicolas Richard, 2014/10/31
- Re: Referring to revisions in the git future, Stefan Monnier, 2014/10/31
- Re: Referring to revisions in the git future, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2014/10/31
- Re: Referring to revisions in the git future, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/10/31
- Re: Referring to revisions in the git future., Stephen J. Turnbull, 2014/10/29
- Re: Referring to revisions in the git future., Barry Warsaw, 2014/10/30
- Re: Referring to revisions in the git future.,
Stephen J. Turnbull <=
- Re: Referring to revisions in the git future., David Kastrup, 2014/10/30
- Re: Referring to revisions in the git future., Alex Bennée, 2014/10/31
- Re: Referring to revisions in the git future., Stefan Monnier, 2014/10/31
- Re: Referring to revisions in the git future., Stephen J. Turnbull, 2014/10/31
- Re: Referring to revisions in the git future., David Kastrup, 2014/10/31
- Re: Referring to revisions in the git future., Stephen J. Turnbull, 2014/10/31
Re: Referring to revisions in the git future., Stefan Monnier, 2014/10/28
Re: Referring to revisions in the git future., David Kastrup, 2014/10/29