Re: On raw strings in <origin> commit field

[Liliana Marie Prikler]

Am Freitag, dem 31.12.2021 um 13:31 +0100 schrieb Ricardo Wurmus:
> 
> Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > Particularly here, you're used to raw commit hashes, so you no
> > longer feel the need to add a comment explaining that it
> > corresponds to a given tag, which others (such as myself, your past
> > self and possibly your future self) would need at least until they
> > themselves also turn a blind eye to raw hashes.  
> 
> FWIW this is not applicable here.  I’m certainly not “used” to using
> raw commit hashes.  I adopted this practise after Ludo’s comments
> that werequoted upthread.
Pardon me for misunderstanding then.  For what it's worth, I do not
read that quote as "let's use raw hashes without context", though, I
think it makes the much weaker statement that we ought to bind the
commit field to a value that is actually a commit (as opposed to a
branch or a tag).  Throughout Guix this has mostly meant let-binding a
revision/commit pair.

> I’ll go whichever way the maintainers decide, because I think there
> are upsides and downsides to all proposed methods, and I just can’t
> make myself feel passionately about any of them :)
Fair enough, it was mentioned that we ought to RFC here and Tobias also
mentioned that in IRC, but it so far didn't happen.  I'm not sure
whether this is the right thread for discussion given that I'm rather
opinionated, but let's see what happens.