Re: What's in a name? Let's use a (uuid,name,email) triplet

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 06:34, Paolo Bonzini [off-list ref] wrote:

On 03/18/2010 10:57 PM, Michael Witten wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 16:39, Martin Langhoff
[off-list ref]  wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 5:29 PM, Michael Witten[off-list ref]
 wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 16:19, Martin Langhoff

quoted

What's the value? For me it'll be "Martin Langhoff". I already have
that.

Well, that's rather egotistical considering you're probably not the
only Martin Langhoff in this world. I'd advocate something like
"Martin Langhoff[off-list ref]".

So you are saying we should change the core datamodel of git to say...
what we already can say?

You see, Martin, you might want/need to stop using "Martin Langhoff
[off-list ref]" as your email account, but there's no
reason why you can't continue to use it for your UUID.

While a gnu.org or gmail.com will (most likely) stay with some person
forever, hindsight is 20/20 and many people may generate his UUID from a
work email.  So, suppose I make my UUID based on [off-list ref] what
will guarantee that in 20 years I won't find a new career as a bartender,
and Red Hat wouldn't hire someone with my same name, and give him the same
email address?

Firstly, the UUID need not be a name/email pair.

Secondly, you're being ridiculous; even if that ridiculous scenario
played out not-infrequently, there would still be less identity
confusion in git repos over time, because changing real life names,
and changing email accounts do happen frequently and are not
ridiculous events.

Heck, some people use gmail only for their personal email, and they rightly
cannot be bothered to create another account to solve a problem they don't
understand and they probably do not have.

This doesn't make any sense. Why does anybody need to create another
account? Are you still confused about what a uuid is this context?

For the UUID to make sense, it would need to be what the acronym says:
universally unique.  An SHA-1 value is _not_ universally unique, it is just
a one-way function.  There are tons of git repos out there with a blob
hashing to e69de29bb2d1d6434b8b29ae775ad8c2e48c5391 or
257cc5642cb1a054f08cc83f2d943e56fd3ebe99.

The SHA-1 is supposed to be an optimization; it's not essential, as
I've already explained; I also get the feeling that you're being
ridiculous again. In particular, I don't see your point.

I have an idea.  Start your own website uuidemail.com.  One registers and
gets an alias for their email, something like
8aacc35ffca0d34fccf8a750e84e3a81bdcb940b@uuidemail.com.  Then people can
start using
8aacc35ffca0d34fccf8a750e84e3a81bdcb940b+pbonzini--redhat.com@uuidemail.com
as their git user.email.  I bet nobody will.

This is nonsense that betrays your misunderstanding.