On Mon, 2009-12-28 at 18:47 +0100, Maximilian Albert wrote:
2009/12/28 ~suv <suv-sf@...58...>:
all revisions are still there (with the original Revision IDs), but as sub-revisions of 8859.
Does this mean that I should never refer to a specific revision by its revision number (e.g., in bug reports) but only using its revision ID because the revision number could accidentally be changed in the future? That's somewhat annoying and makes me wonder why bzr uses revision numbers at all. So what is the suggested policy when referring to revisions?
I would recommend using the user-friendly version numbers because they're so much simpler and 99% of the time they're going to stay the same.
If you want to be 100%, the revision IDs will always be correct, but they're kinda a pain to use.
--Ted