From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make reflog query '@{1219188291}' act as '@{2008/08/19 16:24:51}' Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 15:20:54 -0700 Message-ID: <7vhc9fnxa1.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20080819234433.GJ24212@spearce.org> <20080820193557.GB16626@blimp.local> <20080820194407.GJ3483@spearce.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Alex Riesen , git@vger.kernel.org To: "Shawn O. Pearce" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Aug 21 00:22:17 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KVw48-0006fe-Ux for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 21 Aug 2008 00:22:09 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753407AbYHTWVE (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:21:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753369AbYHTWVD (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:21:03 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:48367 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751901AbYHTWVB (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:21:01 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D098461E50; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:20:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-211.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D152661E4F; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:20:55 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20080820194407.GJ3483@spearce.org> (Shawn O. Pearce's message of "Wed, 20 Aug 2008 12:44:07 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 445D52E4-6F06-11DD-ABE9-3113EBD4C077-77302942!a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: "Shawn O. Pearce" writes: > I was just trying to be cute by using the original commit timestamp > of Git itself. Perhaps 12936648 (1TB / 83)? Well, reverse psychology did not quite work, I guess, so I'd ask more directly. Why not re-send with an update to the same 8-digit rule we use elsewhere?