From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew L Foster Subject: Re: git and time Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 07:50:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20060928145027.26643.qmail@web51011.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060928131710.GE7469@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Cc: Matthew L Foster , Junio C Hamano , Linus Torvalds , Andreas Ericsson , git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff King , Jakub Narebski X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Sep 28 16:50:55 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 1GSxDd-0006Of-3Q for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 28 Sep 2006 16:50:33 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161162AbWI1Ou3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Sep 2006 10:50:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161164AbWI1Ou3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Sep 2006 10:50:29 -0400 Received: from web51011.mail.yahoo.com ([68.142.224.81]:44125 "HELO web51011.mail.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1161162AbWI1Ou2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Sep 2006 10:50:28 -0400 Received: (qmail 26645 invoked by uid 60001); 28 Sep 2006 14:50:27 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=MV+JegTAkud1PyW6grbADyv4Sr5ApZ6XRL64tnsPtsR8czZT20ED1g5ZBVt45ZiBguYk1UgDQ2ez/HrRu20A3M1vgr73FxvgKQjG96Py7MnnmQFDxTVvVdFurrsntGAZH11pZIxef5LBJo1g8207UuIcgLGQoRnBNfid1y6YIoY= ; Received: from [207.172.80.85] by web51011.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 28 Sep 2006 07:50:27 PDT To: Theodore Tso , Sean In-Reply-To: <20060928131710.GE7469@thunk.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: --- Theodore Tso wrote: > In git, we believe that all repositories are equal, and that any sense > that a particular repository is the "master" or the "mainline" is > strictly speaking, a matter of convention. What Matthew I think is > asking for is direct support in git for that notion. No. I merely think git should try harder to ensure that commit order is consistent with time order, it really should (somehow) be impossible for git and gitweb.cgi to have commit dates ~2 days in the future. I think replication is a separate issue. In a distributed system the only "time" that makes any sense or is the most relevant in many situations and most importantly is the only thing that can be semi-trusted is local time. "Creation date" is basically just random text someone entered, there is no guarantee and you are tempting inconsistent time order. And git shouldn't be so fragile as to need each and every git server to have time set semi-correctly, but I guess it's a bigger deal to non-developers as we actually use time and also believe even web interfaces should have consistency and integrity. -Matt -Matt -Matt __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com