You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Should we prefer generating URLs with a specific commit ID rather than a branch name?
A branch isn't stable over time and old generated links (especially those with selection information) will therefore break as the file's contents changes.
If we decided to do this (prefer commit ID) do we also want to provide an option "try and resolve to branch name" for those users who do want a link to the branch?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi Matthew, I prefer commit SHA over branch name when locating a change in git, as you mentioned that branch is more like pointer that is always changing(like master branch), while SHA is a unique identifier.
BTW: do you have a use case which a branch name have to be used instead of SHA?
Should we prefer generating URLs with a specific commit ID rather than a branch name?
A branch isn't stable over time and old generated links (especially those with selection information) will therefore break as the file's contents changes.
If we decided to do this (prefer commit ID) do we also want to provide an option "try and resolve to branch name" for those users who do want a link to the branch?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: