(github.blog)

151 points fastest963 | 1 comments | 31 Oct 25 13:59 UTC | HN request time: 0.316s | source

Show context

hoistbypetard ◴[31 Oct 25 14:45 UTC] No.45772532[source]▶

>>45772064 (OP) #

My instant reaction was: "Wait?! They weren't immutable before?"

I'm glad they're doing this, and it's an unpleasant surprise that they didn't already work this way. I don't understand why they allow mutable releases.

replies(6): >>45772557 #>>45772741 #>>45772761 #>>45773634 #>>45773953 #>>45774010 #

hk1337 ◴[31 Oct 25 15:02 UTC] No.45772741[source]▶

>>45772532 #

Git tags aren’t even really immutable, they’re treated as such but they’re not.

replies(2): >>45773059 #>>45774860 #

1. kimixa ◴[31 Oct 25 18:03 UTC] No.45774860[source]▶

>>45772741 #

Any "given" name/ID (IE anything but the full hash) in a distributed VCS has to be mutable - without some single central arbiter of truth it's simply impossible.

I'm honestly a little surprised people seem to think they might be immutable - I guess maybe if people see "git" as "Actually Github"?

↑

Immutable releases are now generally available on GitHub