Re: Converting bzr revision-IDs to action stamps (was: Bazaar references complicate the git transition)

[Joshua Judson Rosen <rozzin@geekspace.com>]

"Eric S. Raymond" <esr@thyrsus.com> writes:
>
> Joshua Judson Rosen <rozzin@geekspace.com>:
> >
> > It may or may not be true specifically in the case of the mainline emacs
> > revision history; someone will probably need/want to check (if nobody
> > has yet), because it's certainly _possible_ to have situations in bzr
> > where `timestamp!committer' works as a sort of hash bucket but _isn't_
> > specific enough to identify a single unique revision-object.
>
> I know. That's why the *full* form of an action stamp is actually
>
>   {ISO-date }!{email-address}#{sequence-nummber}

Ah, OK--I see that in the reposurgeon manual, now.

I was looking for something like that in your "RFC: Action stamps" post
<http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=3872> and couldn't find it there.

Is the reposurgeon manual the authoritative document on action stamps?
Or is there another doc with more information? (`more information'
being, e.g., the points in various comments attached to
<http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4854>)

(all of this is only really relevant to the matter at hand _if_ there
 are collisions, of course)

> I have needed that generality on some Subversion repositories.

Hunh. It's much less obvious to me why that would happen in svn.

-- 
"'tis an ill wind that blows no minds."