Subject: bug#78890: 31.0.50; Messy vc-annotate buffer names

From: Sean Whitton <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2025 19:27:14 +0100

Hello,

On Thu 26 Jun 2025 at 10:13am -07, Jim Porter wrote:

> On 6/26/2025 9:57 AM, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> Well, I was wondering about this.  I was thinking that using the
>> absolute filename was desirable in that case for disambiguation.
>> If file-buffer is non-nil then we already know it will have been
>> uniquified so as to be unambiguous.
>
> I suppose it's just personal preference, but I'd rather the buffer name err on
> the side of brevity, since in an 80-column frame, an absolute file name could
> easily fill up the entire mode line so that the revision identifier is
> off-screen (to say nothing of other mode line elements).

I'm more concerned about an actual clash in buffer names between files
with the same name in different directories.  What do you think about
that?

-- 
Sean Whitton