From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Approxidate licensing Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:55:01 -0700 Message-ID: <7viriruw16.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Linus Torvalds , dwmw2@infradead.org, git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Oct 11 09:55:40 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 1GXYvs-0002IU-9O for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 11 Oct 2006 09:55:17 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030677AbWJKHzI (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Oct 2006 03:55:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030681AbWJKHzI (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Oct 2006 03:55:08 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao12.cox.net ([68.230.241.27]:50412 "EHLO fed1rmmtao12.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030677AbWJKHzD (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Oct 2006 03:55:03 -0400 Received: from fed1rmimpo02.cox.net ([70.169.32.72]) by fed1rmmtao12.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.01 201-2131-130-101-20060113) with ESMTP id <20061011075502.CEPI26416.fed1rmmtao12.cox.net@fed1rmimpo02.cox.net>; Wed, 11 Oct 2006 03:55:02 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id Yvv41V00h1kojtg0000000 Wed, 11 Oct 2006 03:55:05 -0400 To: Daniel Barkalow In-Reply-To: (Daniel Barkalow's message of "Tue, 10 Oct 2006 13:39:47 -0400 (EDT)") 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: Daniel Barkalow writes: > [1] git log and git blame are pretty impressive, but they don't quite > catch that most of date.c was written by David as part of commit-tree.c, > then Tony replaced it with a version that uses curl, then Edgar separated > it out into a date.c and simultaneously reverted Tony's changes. On the > other hand, the commit messages do say this, and you can use git log and > git blame to verify that they're true. The only thing they don't let > you verify is what the differences are between the date.c added in > ecee9d9e and the similar part of commit-tree.c in 812666c8. If someone > wants to make git blame *really* magic, date.c would be a good test case. That's good to know. I have in my head a super-duper blame that I outlined in my obituary for git-annotate, but that is still a vaporware and will continue to be for some time.