<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><div>On Jul 21, 2011, at 5:18 AM, Tobias Grosser wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div>On 07/21/2011 01:44 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:<br><blockquote type="cite">On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 12:26:29PM +0100, Jay Foad wrote:<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">On 21 July 2011 11:50, Joerg Sonnenberger<<a href="mailto:joerg@britannica.bec.de">joerg@britannica.bec.de</a>> wrote:<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">There is still the major regression with unreadable version numbers.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">...</blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">The problem is answering the question of "do I have it or not". Linear<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">version numbers are much nicer for that.<br></blockquote><br>Sure. So there will never be any way to get linear version numbers with <br>git. ...</div></blockquote><br></div><div>The topic of generation numbers has come up again recently on the git lists and it looks like they might make it in (<a href="http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6702821/git-commit-generation-numbers">http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6702821/git-commit-generation-numbers</a>). Of course this isn't exactly the same as svn because the numbers are only unique within a given branch, but it should still help.</div></body></html>