On 2/11/15, Ross Berteig <r...@cheshireeng.com> wrote: > On 2/11/2015 6:23 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: >> On 2/11/15, j. van den hoff <veedeeh...@googlemail.com> wrote: >>> whatever the reason, the netbsd example (a worst case scenario, really) >>> would suggest to chose 12 instead of 10 as the future default length >>> to avoid collisions these next some hundred years. >> Maybe the default prefix lengths should auto-adjust depending on the >> number of artifacts in the repository? > > The ability to use just a hash prefix is a virtually necessary > convenience for command-line users who would otherwise be faced with the > need to type full hashes. > > But why use HEX digits for this? > > We could use a denser encoding:
I experimented with that in some early prototypes of Fossil. It seemed like a good idea a first, but when I tried using it, I found it awkward. And it became much more difficult to distinguish between branch names and SHA1 hash prefixes. So I went back to using hex. -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
