From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Woodhouse Subject: Re: kernel.org now has gitweb installed Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 22:23:21 +0100 Message-ID: <1114723402.2734.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <42703E79.8050808@zytor.com> <1114673723.12012.324.camel@baythorne.infradead.org> <20050428081005.GG8612@pasky.ji.cz> <1114676955.12012.346.camel@baythorne.infradead.org> <1114680199.12012.363.camel@baythorne.infradead.org> <7v1x8u7g26.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Linus Torvalds , Petr Baudis , "H. Peter Anvin" , Git Mailing List X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Apr 28 23:19:52 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([12.107.209.244]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DRGPt-0003kM-9x for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 28 Apr 2005 23:19:25 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262176AbVD1VY5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Apr 2005 17:24:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262220AbVD1VY5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Apr 2005 17:24:57 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:59273 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262176AbVD1VY4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Apr 2005 17:24:56 -0400 Received: from baythorne.infradead.org ([81.187.226.107] helo=[192.168.129.125]) by pentafluge.infradead.org with esmtpsa (Exim 4.43 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1DRGV5-0006R8-Tm; Thu, 28 Apr 2005 22:24:48 +0100 To: Junio C Hamano In-Reply-To: <7v1x8u7g26.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.2 (2.2.2-1) X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 14:21 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > 2. Assuming that we do want to enforce that parent fields of a > commit object name valid commit objects, is it OK to also > require that the commit timestamp of a child object is not in > the future relative to any and all of its parent commit > objects No. Time is utterly meaningless -- it's perfectly normal for clocks to be out of sync. We really don't want to fall into the trap of assigning any meaning to the timestamp. -- dwmw2