On 2 October 2011 20:07, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: <snip/> > Or did you really mean your example literally, as in you run two > checkouts back to back, without running anything in between, and the > second checkout restores the state before the first one. In that case, > yes, it would be correct to keep the old timestamps. But this is an > optimization that can only apply in a few very specific cases. And > moreoever, how can git know when it is OK to apply that optimization? It > has no idea what commands you might have run since the last time we were > at "master". Yes, I meant it literally. And, no, Git could not possibly know so it would have to be optional behaviour. But it's probably a lot of work for (for most people) little gain. -- 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