> > I mean the combined number of commits and git hash. For example:
> >
> > TARGET=14.0.0
> > cd tde/main/tdelibs
> > echo $(basename $PWD)-trinity-$TARGET~pre$(git log $(git tag | sort |
> > tail -n1)..HEAD --pretty=oneline | wc -l)+$(git rev-parse HEAD | colrm 9)
> >
> > This will give for all the exact same results. This will contain important
> > information == git hash. And also the growing number useful to simple
> > compare "older < later".
> 
> For example, my results for the current tdelibs (in both
> branches):
> 
> + tdelibs-trinity-14.0.0~pre385+189c12d0
> + tdelibs-trinity-3.5.13.2~pre12+205b3397

I'm not against the idea. :) More than likely the people using development branch versions will be above average computer literate users. People with whom hash numbers convey some information.

I'm concerned that to other end-users the string provides little meaning. Most end-users are not geeks. They don't want to deal with hashes. To them a hash is gibberish. A hash is familiar to developers. A date is familiar to all people. :)

tdelibs-trinity-14.0.0_201211101146
tdelibs-trinity-3.5.13.2_201211101146

Darrell