Use unabbreviated git SHA1 for buildid

2012-11-26 Thread Lior Kaplan
Hi, I'd like to raise the question why do we need the full SHA1 for as the build ID? (See http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=b7e6c8459b15a4fdb9ebb269b27cdeea82c8c5c2 ) Using the abbreviated version looks weird enough for users, and I think the full version won't add

Re: Use unabbreviated git SHA1 for buildid

2012-11-26 Thread Stephan Bergmann
On 11/26/2012 01:00 PM, Lior Kaplan wrote: I'd like to raise the question why do we need the full SHA1 for as the build ID? (See http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=b7e6c8459b15a4fdb9ebb269b27cdeea82c8c5c2) Using the abbreviated version looks weird enough for users, and I

Re: Use unabbreviated git SHA1 for buildid

2012-11-26 Thread Lior Kaplan
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Stephan Bergmann sberg...@redhat.comwrote: On 11/26/2012 01:00 PM, Lior Kaplan wrote: I'd like to raise the question why do we need the full SHA1 for as the build ID? (See http://cgit.freedesktop.org/**libreoffice/core/commit/?id=**

Re: Use unabbreviated git SHA1 for buildid

2012-11-26 Thread Miklos Vajna
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 04:26:12PM +0200, Lior Kaplan kaplanl...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks, although I couldn't find the other commit (the first is 349fa28a5998d10b110da1a7fcc6b5b24d5940b1) Yes, because the other (349fa28a95d40a49d579ea66b9b69720f0d85c5c) is a tree, not a commit.

Re: Use unabbreviated git SHA1 for buildid

2012-11-26 Thread Lior Kaplan
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 10:33 PM, Miklos Vajna vmik...@suse.cz wrote: On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 04:26:12PM +0200, Lior Kaplan kaplanl...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks, although I couldn't find the other commit (the first is 349fa28a5998d10b110da1a7fcc6b5b24d5940b1) Yes, because the other