On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 07:43:20 -0500 "Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The difference is that bzr ALSO chooses to support and optimize for a > different case in the default UI presentation, because We[0] consider > that far and away the common case on the one hand, and that people > trying to use the more complex case are ipso facto more able to use a > behavior differing from the norm on the other. > > [0] Note how adroitly I again speak for other people. Practice, > practice! Just to be clear here, Git is also able to supports this model if you so choose. It's quite easy for a server to generate Git tags for every commit it gets. It's just that this is basically a non issue in the Git world. People who use Git aren't crying out for salvation from sha1 numbers. So I think this entire discussion is a bit overblown. But just to be clear, there is nothing in the Git model that prohibits tagging every commit with something you find less objectionable than sha1's. They can appear in the log listings and in gitk etc, and everyone who pulls from the central server will get them. In fact, for some imports of other VCS into Git, exactly that is done; so every commit can be referenced by its sha1 _or_ the "friendly" number it was known by in its original VCS. Sean - 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