Follow-up Comment #3, bug #60654 (project groff):
[comment #2 comment #2:]
> [comment #1 comment #1:]
> > Here's what I'm using for the time being, pretty much cribbed from
StackOverflow.
>
> This unconditionally sets the date on the file, even if it has local changes
more recent than what's in git. Is that the desired behavior?
Nope. I reckon a proper date-re-setting function/script should check that.
Having just done a nine-step one, I'll observe that a common scenario that
tends to wreak havoc on file mtimes, at least for active groff developers, is
"git bisect".
This is possibly something we should document in the FOR-RELEASE file.
Misleading time stamps will do the most damage in generation of a distribution
archive--assuming most downstreams still work from those.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?60654>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
