On Sat, 2013-03-23 at 12:36 +0000, John Keeping wrote:
> > What do you all think about something like the output of
> > "git describe --always" instead of the SHA-1?
> I think Christoph was suggesting that it should use the revision as
> specified by the user, presumably falling back to HEAD when only one
> revision has been specified.
That was the idea... cause it has the best chance of being somehow
remembered/recognised by the user...
Taking any description, doesn't necessarily mean that the user has ever
seen this before or remembers it.

> I suspect in that case we have
> to be careful about special characters, perhaps it's best to just fall
> back to the SHA1 if we encounter something like
> "origin/master^{/^diff.c}" which is likely to cause issues with shell
> quoting.
Or maybe just pseudo-quote any such special characters by "_".
Otherwise,... one might have to many cases, where one falls back to the
SHA1... and looses a lot of the benefits.


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Reply via email to