On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 5:56 PM, Mike Hommey <m...@glandium.org> wrote:
>
> OTOH, how often does one refer to trees or blobs with abbreviated sha1s?
> Most of the time, you'd use abbreviated sha1s for commits. And the number
> of commits in git and the kernel repositories are much lower than the
> number of overall objects.
See that whole other discussion about this. I agree. If we only ever
worried about just commits, the abbreviation length wouldn't need to
be grown nearly as aggressively. The current default would still be
wrong for the kernel, but it wouldn't be as noticeably wrong, and
updating it to 8 or 9 would be fine.
That said, people argued against that too. We *do* end up having
abbreviated SHA1's for blobs in the diff index. When I said that _I_
neer use it, somebody piped up to say that they do.
So I'd rather just keep the existing semantics (a hash is a hash is a
hash), and just abbreviate at a sufficient point that we don't have to
worry too much about disambiguating further by object type.
Linus
