tytso@xxxxxxx wrote: > On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 10:09:17AM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> I have never heard of any version of Git copying poorly with #1 >> (commits with the same timestamp). Avoiding it artificially leads >> inevitably to timestamps in the future when you somehow try to assign >> 100 timestamps for the series you have rebased on top of a patch >> committed a few seconds ago. >> >> Incrementing the timestamp to ensure strictly monotonic commits seems >> like a recipe for trouble to me. > > Um, I'm guessing you spent a lot of time typing your note, but not a > lot of time looking at my most recent patch? My most recent patch for > guilt simply will set the time of the patch to the current time to > avoid setting it into the future. I read it, and I did not like that specific part. I even responded to it. I guess "leads inevitably to timestamps in the future" was a poor choice of words, though. -- 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