We have allowed for git commit hashes but if this metadata file is a file in a git repo then it will not be able to reference it's latest git commit hash. So, ironically, git based projects which want to represent the metadata as a file will not be able to reference their own hashes natively in the git repository. A server side component could possibly serve it correctly alongside the repository but at that point it breaks the typical git paradigm.
All of that to say, there are plenty of options given our current regex but I'm wondering if allowing for timestamps in the revision field would be a positive? In sense, allowing this is just a time based version of incremental version numbers.
Re: the regex for the revision attribute on https://docs.burrito.bible/en/latest/avocado/blue/metadata_root.html, perhaps we should expand that to allow for a timestamp?
We have allowed for git commit hashes but if this metadata file is a file in a git repo then it will not be able to reference it's latest git commit hash. So, ironically, git based projects which want to represent the metadata as a file will not be able to reference their own hashes natively in the git repository. A server side component could possibly serve it correctly alongside the repository but at that point it breaks the typical git paradigm.
All of that to say, there are plenty of options given our current regex but I'm wondering if allowing for timestamps in the revision field would be a positive? In sense, allowing this is just a time based version of incremental version numbers.