Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, 27 Jan 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > > The + format is much easier to read and understand than the - format > > > original proposed by Junio. > > > > I tend to disagree (I do not claim + is _less_ easier to read, though). > > > > They are of comparable readability, and I think plus breaks > > GIT-VERSION-GEN (the primary reason it replaces '-' to '.' is to work > > around RPM limitation IIRC, and I do not know what '+' does to RPM > > offhand). > > Note that scripts using git-describe to name archives break also on > challenged file / operating systems. IIRC on DOS/FAT32 '+' has problems > with it. > > > But I do not have a strong feeling either way. > > Neither have I. Me neither, actually. The + just felt more right, as its literally "that tag, plus n commits". But if + is going to cause pain on operating systems that somehow decided disallowing bytes other than NUL was OK and the right thing to do, then maybe - is the safer choice here. -- Shawn. - 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