On Friday, September 22, 2023 2:44 PM, Ben Boeckel wrote: >On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 14:12:31 -0400, rsbecker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >> What confuses me is how, in the other subthread, that adding sleep 1 >> to the construction of history should make any difference. My >> understanding is that the path to the tag is invariant of the commit-date. > >Yes. It is explained that the commit date stored is only to 1 second granularity. Since >the commits are stored in commit-date, an equal commit date ends up "twisting" the >history and traversing some ancestors of commits before the commits themsevles. >This loses the "seen" bit tracking that is done and ends up labeling way more >commits as "not part of" ancestors. By sleeping for a second, the commit dates can >be totally ordered reliably. This is going to be awkward to resolve as time_t only resolves (portably) to 1 second intervals. I still would prefer the resolution to be path-based rather than time-based.
