Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

No there isn't a similarity to svn revnos. Rev 125 of a branch in a repo isn't a specific commit it is a specific depth in the tree. In your example you couldn't talk about a singular Rev 125 unless there really was one Rev 125. These numbers wouldn't be like Hg's revnos they would be stable across clones.



My intention was that a single branch could have an unambiguous revno.

As pointed out elsewhere in the thread, that requires that branch identity is maintained across a fork+merge, but that seems reasonable to me?


In git, a branch is just a ref that points to the most recent commit in a development series. The history of the branch has no explicit link to the branch name. Individual commits do not belong to a branch. So the commits in the history of a single branch will not have unique generation numbers.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: