On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 at 15:42, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > "Remo Senekowitsch" <remo@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Btw. since the thread was started, the implementation in Jujutsu has > > been completed and I've been pushing commits with the change-id header > > to various remotes for a while now. It works well. Forges can start > > taking advantage of it. (I hope I find time to help work on that.) > > It should work well, until somebody finds your random is not random > enough, right? Unlike our object name that depends on the contents > (hence a duplicate unless the cryptographic hash function collides > means they are truly the same commit), there is no grabally unique > ID assigner involved in your implementation, right? A forge can decide to enforce that no two commits on the main branch have the same change ID, for example.
