() Stefano Lattarini <[email protected]>
() Sat, 28 Apr 2012 19:30:00 +0200
+A reference to another change should be expressed as a date
+and optionally a title if the date is insufficient to uniquely
+identify the reference.
+We recommend this over using a VCS commit identifier primarily
+to keep the change log self-contained, and secondarily to avoid
+lossage should the project switch to another VCS in the future.
Here, we should advise to use the date and (optionally) the
summary of the referenced change *in addition* to its commit ID
(or a proper "abridged" versions thereof, e.g., in git, the
output of "git describe").
I don't think the current wording precludes using a VCS commit ID,
additionally; "recommend over" doesn't prohibit such info. Maybe
that's a personal quirk, though (i don't take myself or this
document as seriously as, say, "MUST NOT" in an RFC protocol spec).
Otherwise, one loses the possibility of following
cross-references between commits with a single click of mouse
when browsing the VCS history through tools like 'gitk' (and
the equivalent ones for other VCS).
Could you suggest another wording, then?
