Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Proposal for human readable revision IDs

[Thomas Haas]

Bruce Stephens wrote:
> Andy Jones <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> [...]
> 
> 
>>If you want a guaranteed unique name for the revision, use the
>>revision hash id, as now.  The same applies to the "abbreviated
>>revision ID" attack outlined above: you'd want to use the revision
>>ID in your 'montone pull' to make sure you got the right one; but
>>from then on you could use the nickname.
> 
> 
> OK, how about this as an implementation: you add a lua hook that's
> used when printing a revision id.  It could take a hash as an
> argument, containing the revision and all certs that apply to that
> revision (or something similar).  Then change the code to use that
> hook, and add an option so that users can turn it off (to get the full
> hash).  Obviously the default would be to display the revision id.
> 
> Then people can experiment with truncated hashes, nicknames, and all
> sorts of things (provided they can be constructed from the certs on
> that one revision, so that limits things a bit).

... the hook shall be available for all identifiers, not only revisions
-- and, preferably, the abbreviated id should be stored in the database.

Regards
- tom