Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: user-friendly hash formats, redux

[Nathan Myers]

On Sat, Dec 04, 2004 at 11:20:31AM -0700, Derek Scherger wrote:
> Nathan Myers wrote:
> >Participants on this list are self-selected as tolerating the hex
> >strings.  To any normal person, they simply scream "not ready for
> >prime time".  
> 
> When I first read the monotone docs 6 or so months ago I think I had
> different initial reactions. First, "wow, this sounds really 
> two interesting" and "hmm... those hex id's sound really ugly".
> 
> However, after working with it for a few days I had almost forgotten 
> about the ugly hex id "problem". 

I think you may be missing the point.  It *doesn't* *matter* how 
tolerable the hex ids became.  People who take one look at the hex ids 
in the tutorial and say "forget it" aren't on this list, but they are 
the ones who need to adopt Monotone if it isn't to die on the vine.

> Rather than trying to decode hex ids into pronouncable, but 
> unrememberable things, how about when talking about revisions we talk 
> about them in terms of their author and the date they were written? 
> These aren't necessarily unique though and perhaps another cert on
> each revision containing a 1 line summary or name for the revision 
> would help?

Aliases are good too.  To invent good aliases automatically would 
be nice.  Short, sayable and rememberable (if not "memorable") hash 
formats, though, are certainly easier to implement.  Once people stop
being spooked by the tutorial, we'll have a better chance of finding
somebody to implement lots of nice features. 

Nathan Myers
address@hidden