Mostly playing librarian again. On Sat, Sep 04, 2010 at 06:32:57 +0000, Jason Dagit wrote: > Is it possible for us to match git-annotate? I think the hurdle here > is that they give hashes in their output. I'm not sure if they are > change hashes or tree hashes. The feasibility of matching git depends > on which one it is, I think.
So, it seems the discussion has partly shifted to human-readable annotate. Looks like interesting stuff. Here's the ticket for readable annotate output: http://bugs.darcs.net/issue25 It has a two digit number in a day where issue2000 is fast approaching. It looks like the output advocated was from git blame (which I think is also what Jason is suggesting), and that Benedikt was showing me this page: http://book.git-scm.com/5_finding_issues_-_git_blame.html $ git blame sha1_file.c ... 0fcfd160 (Linus Torvalds 2005-04-18 13:04:43 -0700 8) */ 0fcfd160 (Linus Torvalds 2005-04-18 13:04:43 -0700 9) #include "cache.h" 1f688557 (Junio C Hamano 2005-06-27 03:35:33 -0700 10) #include "delta.h" a733cb60 (Linus Torvalds 2005-06-28 14:21:02 -0700 11) #include "pack.h" 8e440259 (Peter Eriksen 2006-04-02 14:44:09 +0200 12) #include "blob.h" 8e440259 (Peter Eriksen 2006-04-02 14:44:09 +0200 13) #include "commit.h" 8e440259 (Peter Eriksen 2006-04-02 14:44:09 +0200 14) #include "tag.h" 8e440259 (Peter Eriksen 2006-04-02 14:44:09 +0200 15) #include "tree.h" f35a6d3b (Linus Torvalds 2007-04-09 21:20:29 -0700 16) #include "refs.h" 70f5d5d3 (Nicolas Pitre 2008-02-28 00:25:19 -0500 17) #include "pack-revindex.h"628522ec (Junio C Hamano Also, our last sprint report [1] said "Taking a page from git blame, there will be one line per source file line, with columns for patch identifier, author name, date and finally the line. One of the design questions was how we should best refer to darcs patches, the current best candidate being a prefix of the darcs patch metadata hash." -- http://blog.darcs.net/2010/03/darcs-hacking-sprint-4-report.html As for the patch info hash prefix (see http://wiki.darcs.net/Hashes ), this hash is produced in Darcs.Patch.Info.makeFileName and seems to use three sections: timestamp, author hash, actual patchinfo hash, as an example: 20100904030947-fb03a-fac657d51ee80c33488031d8bdcfab769aa7f83c I guess we could use a prefix of the third segment, so continuing that example: fac658d5 We originally had an idea of intelligently picking the smallest prefix that would be unambiguous for a given local repository, but I think Ganesh has recently pointed out on IRC that maybe just going for uniformly chars could be a better alternative. (I speculate because a repo-local criterion of ambiguity would be misleading as the user could try to use the prefix elsewhere, uniform behaviour is nice, and also simpler is simpler) Phew! I hope that's about all for the prior discussiony stuff! Eric [1] I'm not actually expecting somebody to think to go look it up there -- archiving fail -- just I that I'd sworn I'd written this down somewhere and I think this must have been it -- Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow> For a faster response, try +44 (0)1273 64 2905 or xmpp:ko...@jabber.fr (Jabber or Google Talk only) _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list darcs-users@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
