| 24 Mar 2025 |
 Tristan Ross | Sure | 23:13:47 |
 ElvishJerricco | https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/392904/files | 23:19:19 |
| ElvishJerricco | * https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/392904 | 23:19:20 |
| ElvishJerricco | Tristan Ross, emily: I wonder if it's actually bad for me to revert the revCount though. I think, as nixpkgs moves forward in time, that number is meant to be monotonic. If, for some reason, anyone has been using it as an ever-increasing version number (even though it was the same number for some 5 or 6 years by 24.11), then this would bring the number down and cause a problem | 23:33:18 |
 emily | probably just leave it increased | 23:33:43 |
| emily | since it's been like that for half a year now without issue | 23:33:47 |
| ElvishJerricco | yea that's what I'm thinking | 23:33:51 |
| Tristan Ross | In reply to @elvishjerricco:matrix.org
Tristan Ross, emily: I wonder if it's actually bad for me to revert the revCount though. I think, as nixpkgs moves forward in time, that number is meant to be monotonic. If, for some reason, anyone has been using it as an ever-increasing version number (even though it was the same number for some 5 or 6 years by 24.11), then this would bring the number down and cause a problem I think the flake changes the rev as well so I would go with Emily's suggestion for non flake users who uses it. | 23:34:39 |
| ElvishJerricco | I will revert the shortRev though, since the old one appears to not be a real rev? While the new one is | 23:34:39 |
| Tristan Ross | Huh | 23:34:53 |
| ElvishJerricco | or, emily is there a fancy jj I could do to make sure it's not just some ambiguous prefix of a rev? | 23:36:03 |
| ElvishJerricco | actually no I think git would say it's ambiguous, not "bad revision 'gfedcba'" | 23:36:23 |
| emily | there's a very easy way to tell that gfedcba isn't a real rev | 23:36:30 |
| Tristan Ross | git show? | 23:36:44 |
| emily | (but also the g is a prefix, not part of the actual hash) | 23:36:46 |
| emily | (hint: python3 -c 'print("".join(reversed("fedcba")))') | 23:37:20 |
| ElvishJerricco | .... hey would ya look at that | 23:37:33 |
| emily | er, well actually | 23:37:35 |
| emily | usually the g is a prefix in these things | 23:37:40 |
| emily | but I guess in this case it might literally just be a g | 23:37:46 |
| emily | on account of alphabet | 23:37:49 |
| ElvishJerricco | ok, so I'll revert the shortRev but not the revCount | 23:38:05 |
| ElvishJerricco | ok done | 23:39:45 |
| 25 Mar 2025 |
 Vladimír Čunát | I see five git objects matching fedcb, one is even a commit. So it seems realistic that we'll get a fedcba within a few years. | 06:59:43 |
| emily | but not with a g at least | 12:04:00 |
| Vladimír Čunát | Yes, but adding g is normal, e.g.
$ git describe
24.11-7743-g8fc69087539b
| 12:10:34 |
| emily | right. but do we do it for our actual shortRevs? | 12:18:32 |
|  Marie changed their display name from Marie to Marie Ramlow. | 17:42:41 |
| Marie changed their display name from Marie Ramlow to Marie. | 18:55:48 |
| 26 Mar 2025 |
|  raboof left the room. | 02:31:10 |
