Stephan Bergmann-2 wrote > > Using pretty-printed dates would make it easier to disambiguate the > seven-letter commit ID prefixes to the complete IDs if later commits > happen to introduce IDs with the same prefix (in which case the commit > date would help narrow done in which commit range to look for the given > prefix). (Not that the full Git IDs are unambiguous, either. But when > they start to clash, we are fucked, anyway.) >
May I argue that the Age code I propose on this topic fixes that problem? Since it is an age, there is no chance that in the future the code will repeat itself. The truncated 7 letters of the SHA may happen to repeat (although the probability is possibly very low) Just a correction to my previous email: in ten years the core would be 4085.31260 which is easily distinguished from the current builds which are around 414.91491 Best regards, Pedro -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Naming-builds-Please-tp3556898p3561011.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
