On 05/12/16 22:24, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Ramsay Jones <ramsay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> As I said, the original version of the patch just removed the >> --abbrev=7, but then I started to think about why you might have >> used --abbrev in the first place (first in commit 9b88fcef7 and >> again in commit bf505158d). Making sure to override the configuration >> was the only thing I could come up with. So, I was hoping you could >> remember why! :-P > > Nope. As a maintainer support script, the only thing I cared about > it is that there is no -gXXXX at the end for anything I release ;-) > >> (I assumed it was to force a measure of uniformity/reproducibility). > > You cannot force uniformity/reproducibility with fixed abbrev, > unless you set abbreviation length to 40, so you are correct to add > "a measure of" there ;-) Indeed. ;-) > The first choice (i.e. 4) may have had a > justification to force absolute minimum, and the second one (i.e. 7) > may have had a justifiation to make it clear that we are using the > same setting as the default, so in post-1.7.10 era, I think it is > fine for us to just say "we have been using the same as default, so > let's not specify anything explicitly". So, you would be happy with just removing the '--abbrev' argument? (That's fine by me; I don't set core.abbrev!) ATB, Ramsay Jones