On Fri, 29 Jul 2005, Ryan Anderson wrote:
> Maybe it'd make sense to have the commits refuse to add a commit when it
> would be younger than one of it's parents?

No, the git-rev-list thing really was a bug, it was just that I hadn't 
thought things through when I wrote it, and the "normal" case (ie the ones 
I had tested) just happened to work because it's a common one.

In other words - I had taken a shortcut without thinking it through.

The date really isn't important - the algorithm I had works fine even if 
dates are totally screwed up, it just had a stupid bug.

And trying to make the date more important than it is will just inevitably 
lead to _worse_ problems down the road. 

So the date is a good heuristic (we have to traverse the commits in _some_
order, and the date order just happens to be one that ends up giving the
minimum number of commits "usually"), but any time we _depend_ on dates
one way or the other that would be a good.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to