Re: [PATCH] Docs: SubmittingPatches: Clarify convention for git commit references

[Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>]

On Thu, 2015-05-21 at 11:44 -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2015-05-21 at 10:59 -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> >> Clarify the convention for commit references in changelogs so it matches
> >> what checkpatch suggests; see d311cd44545f ("checkpatch: add test for
> >> commit id formatting style in commit log").
> >>
> >> I chose a different example to make the ("") around the description more
> >> obvious.
> > []
> >> diff --git a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> > []
> >> @@ -168,27 +168,18 @@ resources.  In addition to giving a URL to a mailing list archive or
> > []
> >> +When referring to a specific commit, please include both the first 12
> >
> > maybe
> >
> > When referring to a specific commit, please include both 12 or more
> > or "at least 12" or " a minimum of 12".
> 
> OK.  There's value in brevity.  I was trying to avoid the "if 12 is
> good, 40 must be better" idea, because 40-char SHA-1s make changelogs
> ugly and hard to read.

completely agree.

> My git-fu isn't awesome

Yeah, mine either.

>  (git log --oneline --abbrev-commit --abbrev=10
> | cut -f1 -d" " | grep ...........), but I *think* we have three git
> SHA-1s so far that aren't unique in 10 characters (8b82547e338/e
> 3ee50141858/b a7aa92d1b49/a), and everything is still unique in 11 or
> 12-char SHA1s.

Josh's seems to be strong though.

http://blog.cuviper.com/2013/11/10/how-short-can-git-abbreviate/

12 should be safe for a little while longer.