From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: git and time Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 19:31:47 -0700 Message-ID: <7vhcyukpkc.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <20060926233321.GA17084@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20060927002745. 15344.qmail@web51005.mail.yahoo.com> <20060926205632.5d487cc9.seanlkml@sympatico.ca> <7vk63qnlc2.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Sep 27 04:31:53 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 1GSPDF-0001BS-6f for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 27 Sep 2006 04:31:53 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750813AbWI0Cbu (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Sep 2006 22:31:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750817AbWI0Cbt (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Sep 2006 22:31:49 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao06.cox.net ([68.230.241.33]:37042 "EHLO fed1rmmtao06.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750813AbWI0Cbs (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Sep 2006 22:31:48 -0400 Received: from fed1rmimpo01.cox.net ([70.169.32.71]) by fed1rmmtao06.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.01 201-2131-130-101-20060113) with ESMTP id <20060927023148.OKVK6235.fed1rmmtao06.cox.net@fed1rmimpo01.cox.net>; Tue, 26 Sep 2006 22:31:48 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo01.cox.net with bizsmtp id TEXk1V00m1kojtg0000000 Tue, 26 Sep 2006 22:31:45 -0400 To: David Lang In-Reply-To: (David Lang's message of "Tue, 26 Sep 2006 18:31:59 -0700 (PDT)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: David Lang writes: >>> remember that a pach could be merged to many trees in any order. which >>> merge date do you want to know about? >> >> The date that repository I am looking at with gitweb first had >> that commit, of course. What other dates did you have in mind? > > if that repository is then merged into another one, what date would > that second one record for that commit? the date it was pulled there? > > in many cases this would seem to be useless or distracting information > (you already display where in the history the merge took place, do you > really need to attach that date to all changes that arrive from the > branch?) Usually, but not on fast forward. Only when somebody is interested in the particular question "when did this commit has become part of this branch" it becomes relevant. And do not get me wrong. I am in principle agreeing with you that this is an extra information for most of the time -- I even doubt "when did this commit has become part of this branch" is all that useful.