On Wednesday 14 of November 2012 22:29:07 Darrell Anderson wrote:
> > 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
>

Yes, the date is known by everyone. But, on the other hand - users has only 
interested in "it's newer?" This will recognize easily using 'pre' numbers. 
And when user wants to us - developers - to tell which version have, we 
prefer for git hash. And user will be able to provide git hash.

Date is less useful for us. Find the appropriate git hash requires extra work. 
And 'pre' number i combination with git hash therefore provides information 
for both - for users and also for developers. Bear in mind that this 
designation applies only to development versions.

Slavek
--