On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 20:18, Mark Lodato <lodatom@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 2009/5/2 Michael Witten <mfwitten@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> I also dislike the use of 'name' rather than 'hash'; a name is
>> something provided by the user, but a hash is something computed. The
>> use of sha[-]1 is even more egregious.
>
> What about "identifier" as a compromise between "hash" and "name"?
> This is really what we're talking about - a way of identifying
> objects.
It's the same problem, in my opinion. '[Cryptographic] hash' says so
much more and still remains quite generic.
Also, continuing with 'sha1' doesn't seem satisfactory:
http://marc.info/?l=git&m=124068702303042&w=2
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html