On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 11:20 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > "Equality testing?" --- that makes me worried. short=7 does not chomp > them at 7 but only tells rev-parse to use at least 7. You may get 8 or > more if there are other objects that share the same prefix when you get > them. > > Perhaps by forcing "at least 7" everywhere you are getting consistent > result that makes them easier to compare. > > But considering that this is a candidate for a general mechanism to > eventual grow into the git-sequencer, and that we expect to have richer, > smarter, and/or more complex set of tools that feeds you the TODO list, > I'd feel safer if the internal comparison used to determine which one > commit the user meant in his TODO file is robust and does not rely on > where the abbreviated object name was chomped at. Slightly offtopic, but has there ever been any discussion about the scenario that the during a rebase operation, a new object might be created that has the same first 7 abbreviation as another "pick" that comes later? It's unlikely, but it might get more likely as rebasing grows in complexity and number of new objects created. Thanks, Tarmigan -- 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
