Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> @@ -301,7 +328,8 @@ int parse_commit_buffer(struct commit *item, const void *buffer, unsigned long s
>> pptr = &commit_list_insert(new_parent, pptr)->next;
>> }
>> }
>> - item->date = parse_commit_date(bufptr, tail);
>> + item->date = parse_commit_committer_date(bufptr, tail);
>> + item->author_date = parse_commit_author_date(bufptr, tail);
>> ...
>> diff --git a/commit.h b/commit.h
>> index 67bd509..de07525 100644
>> --- a/commit.h
>> +++ b/commit.h
>> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ struct commit {
>> void *util;
>> unsigned int indegree;
>> unsigned long date;
>> + unsigned long author_date;
>
> While walking we keep many of them in-core, and 8-byte each for each
> commit objects add up. We do not want to make "struct commit" any
> larger than it already is.
Having said that, I do not see a reasonable alternative
implementation than adding an author-date field to struct commit
without major restructuring if we were to add this feature.
So please do not take this part of the response as a "patch rejected
because we do not want to add anything to this structure". We'll
think of something down the road, but as an independent topic after
this gets in (or doesn'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