From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sean Subject: Re: git and time Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 23:43:09 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20060926233321.GA17084@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20060927002745.15344.qmail@web51005.mail.yahoo.com> <20060927033459.GA27622@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Matthew L Foster , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Sep 27 05:43:21 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GSQKK-000069-4K for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 27 Sep 2006 05:43:16 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932364AbWI0DnN (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Sep 2006 23:43:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932363AbWI0DnN (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Sep 2006 23:43:13 -0400 Received: from bayc1-pasmtp08.bayc1.hotmail.com ([65.54.191.168]:7759 "EHLO BAYC1-PASMTP08.CEZ.ICE") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932364AbWI0DnM (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Sep 2006 23:43:12 -0400 X-Originating-IP: [65.94.249.130] X-Originating-Email: [seanlkml@sympatico.ca] Received: from linux1.attic.local ([65.94.249.130]) by BAYC1-PASMTP08.CEZ.ICE over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 26 Sep 2006 20:51:15 -0700 Received: from guru.attic.local ([10.10.10.28]) by linux1.attic.local with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GSQKE-0004Sk-3e; Tue, 26 Sep 2006 23:43:10 -0400 To: Jeff King Message-Id: <20060926234309.b16aa44e.seanlkml@sympatico.ca> In-Reply-To: <20060927033459.GA27622@coredump.intra.peff.net> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.7 (GTK+ 2.10.3; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Sep 2006 03:51:16.0187 (UTC) FILETIME=[2EE21AB0:01C6E1E8] Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 23:34:59 -0400 Jeff King wrote: > Right. So you really want to know not "when did this commit enter this > repo" but rather "when did this head/branch first contain this commit" > (since there may be multiple branches within a repo). Even though it's being a bit pedantic, I have to disagree with you here. The question the user is asking is exactly, "When did this commit enter _this_ repo?". Because of the design of git, such a question must be converted into a question regarding reflogs and head/branch values etc... But the user doesn't care anything about all that. They're just interested in the date/time the commit was published in the repository in question, not the date time the commit was originally created in some distant repo. Sean