VCS comparison table
torvalds at osdl.org
Wed Oct 18 17:22:58 BST 2006
On Wed, 18 Oct 2006, Jakub Narebski wrote:
> > Normally, you'd just use the branch-name. Nobody ever uses the SHA1's
> > directly.
> With the exception of having sometimes commit-ids in the commit messages,
> for example "Fixes bug introduced by aabbcc00" (although usually you just
> write "Fixes bug in some_function in some_file"), and automatically
> This reverts d119e3de13ea1493107bd57381d0ce9c9dd90976 commit.
Yes. But in both cases, that's usually because you literally ended up
having the commit name because somebody else (which _can_ be you) searched
for it (with something like "bisect") and gave it to you.
So even that case is really about communicating a stable name from one
place (the "find the bug") to another (the "revert the buggy commit").
So yes, _communication_ should always happen by full SHA1's, because those
are the only thing that always remain stable.
(The fact that "gitk" and I think "gitweb" can then turn them into
hyperlinks in the commit message is obviously one reason we then tend to
give them such prominent visibility - they actually end up being very
useful later on).
In bzr, either you don't get the hyperlinks, or you need to use the
non-simple name in the commit messages, since the simple names don't
actually work. Either way, it's an inferior setup.
More information about the bazaar