On Thursday 2007, March 01, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Got it. > > So, in a very real sense, we have file ids. Even tree ids. And commit > ids. Absolutely. Moreso than CVS/SVN. Putting $Id$ $Rev$ in a git managed file would have far more meaning that it does in a CVS managed file. Actually, $Id$ covers the file hash; $Rev$ covers the commit hash. I wonder if the tree id would be useful to finish the set? The reason it's so hard to do is because putting the file id in the file would change the file, and hence its Id. Ouch. However, I reckon the upcoming gitattributes stuff is going to have no trouble keeping the file contents stable from git's point of view and yet let you mangle/unmangle the contents with this keyword stuff. Actually once gitattributes exists we almost have to have a $Id$, the hash of the working directory file isn't stable because it might have had it's line endings mangled. On the other hand we could argue that git-hash-object should have unmangling options anyway. Andy -- Dr Andy Parkins, M Eng (hons), MIET andyparkins@xxxxxxxxx - 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