From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jakub Narebski Subject: Re: git and time Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 01:32:50 +0200 Organization: At home Message-ID: References: <20060926232316.98065.qmail@web51009.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Sep 27 01:33:25 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 1GSMQJ-0002zf-Op for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 27 Sep 2006 01:33:12 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932494AbWIZXdI (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Sep 2006 19:33:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932499AbWIZXdI (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Sep 2006 19:33:08 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:64721 "EHLO ciao.gmane.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932494AbWIZXdG (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Sep 2006 19:33:06 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1GSMQ0-0002v2-5w for git@vger.kernel.org; Wed, 27 Sep 2006 01:32:52 +0200 Received: from host-81-190-26-96.torun.mm.pl ([81.190.26.96]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 27 Sep 2006 01:32:52 +0200 Received: from jnareb by host-81-190-26-96.torun.mm.pl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 27 Sep 2006 01:32:52 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: git@vger.kernel.org X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: host-81-190-26-96.torun.mm.pl Mail-Copies-To: jnareb@gmail.com User-Agent: KNode/0.10.2 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Matthew L Foster wrote: > After seeing how git currently accepts a remote repository's timestamp > it occurred to me that git should probably instead prefer the time > a particular changeset was committed to _this_ repository. Perhaps > I don't know enough about git but it seems to me the important > information is when a particular changeset was committed to this > repository, all other remote/sub/parent repositories' timestamps > are secondary (or at least should be tracked separately). First, the information you want is contained in reflog. Dates the head tip got the specified value. Second, git cannot rewrite commits (and commits contain timestamp) when fetching commit from remote repository for performance reasons. Third, git uses timestams as heuristics, but relies on parent information. -- Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland ShadeHawk on #git