From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew L Foster Subject: Re: git and time Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 15:55:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20060928225505.23517.qmail@web51003.mail.yahoo.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Cc: Shawn Pearce , Linus Torvalds , Rogan Dawes , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Sep 29 00:55:35 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 1GT4mv-0002kD-5Q for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 29 Sep 2006 00:55:30 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161365AbWI1WzJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Sep 2006 18:55:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161368AbWI1WzI (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Sep 2006 18:55:08 -0400 Received: from web51003.mail.yahoo.com ([206.190.38.134]:47221 "HELO web51003.mail.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1161369AbWI1WzH (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Sep 2006 18:55:07 -0400 Received: (qmail 23519 invoked by uid 60001); 28 Sep 2006 22:55:06 -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=e05XPH4Eonva+JRQecI92OJDyXdS5uPeebvIqz5YFTUY0Rko+Ot4EMS8QCCB8GC9veVpMbWmj++s94DQNwft91fM7lRu2FXxK1pdcHHi/ttQAQ8sOPJkM8gmBtLum/uxxrrXWtIkAAYJZdC/gm28cboBjcD89C9GutGJt8c4ecA= ; Received: from [207.172.80.85] by web51003.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 28 Sep 2006 15:55:05 PDT To: Johannes Schindelin In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: --- Johannes Schindelin wrote: > what exactly are you trying to achieve here? Timestamps not being all over the place in gitweb.cgi. > If you really want to understand why git does not rely on timestamps, and > why it should not, and why you can still be happy nevertheless, there are > enough answers in this thread. I agree and understand that distributed git should not and does not rely on timestamps, I am just suggesting that it might be worthwhile to _locally_ track local commit time more efficiently for local use in things like gitweb.cgi. -Matt __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com