Jon Bright <address@hidden> writes:
[...]
My intuition said that too - but then I remembered the big
discussion about Graydon not liking GUIDs, back when we were
originally discussing revisions. An alternative, which sticks with
a kind of content-basedness, might be to take the hash of the branch
name.
Or a timestamp, or use the key of the person creating the revision.
It doesn't really need to be 160 bits of entropy, I suspect---it's
just to disambiguate otherwise identical initial revisions, so one
could use something meaningful like a timestamp. That might cause
confusion, I guess.