On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 10:23:37PM -0500, Eric S. Raymond wrote:

> Jeff King <p...@peff.net>:
> > But I really wonder if anybody actually cares about adding sub-second
> > timestamp support, or if it is merely "because SVN has it".
> There's actually one possible other reason to care.  1-second granularity 
> isn't quite fine enough to guarantee that a (committer, timestamp)
> pair is a unique key.  1 microsecond granularity would be.

You can't guarantee that such a pair is unique, anyway, due to clock

A much more compelling argument to me would be that you are doing some
bidirectional magic between git and svn, and you want to make make sure
that an svn->git->svn translation will result in the exact same bytes.
Then the argument is still "because SVN has it", but at least it is "and
we interoperate with it" and not simply chasing a cool but useless

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

Reply via email to