Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxx> writes: > On Thu, 28 Sep 2006, Matthew L Foster wrote: >> >> I am not saying git should "police any one else's clocks", I am saying git should be designed or >> configured in such a way, using local time, that it obviates the current reliance on everyone >> else's clock being set correctly. > > Matt! > > THERE IS NO SUCH RELIANCE! NONE. > > Trust me. When we say that git ignores time, WE MEAN IT. Git does not rely > on time, git does not use time, git does not CARE! > > Please stop looking at gitweb _immediately_. If you think time has some > meaning for git, stop. It doesn't. We've told you over and over and over > again that there is absolutely _zero_ reliance on everybody else's clock > being set correctly. The damn clock could go _backwards_, or make huge > jumping purple leaps of imagination, and git wouldn't care. I think Matthew means (by "relying") that everybody's clock must be set correctly in order for us to show the commits in gitweb or rev-list output so that their timestamps are monotonically decreasing (because we list things from newer to older). I sympathise. We order things by causality (i.e. ancestry order), but that unfortunately (!!) happens to match timestamp order for simple history made on a single machine. This can easily lead to such a misunderstanding that we are somehow trying to show things in linear time order, hence we subscribe to the notion of global, uniform and monotonic time. Of course, we don't. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html