Re: Git checkout preserve timestamp?

From: Bill Lear <rael@zopyra.com>
Date: Mar 5, 2007, 19:59 UTC
Message-ID: <17900.30394.172067.743310@lisa.zopyra.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0703052014020.22628@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>

On Monday, March 5, 2007 at 20:16:35 (+0100) Johannes Schindelin writes:

Show 33 quoted lines

>Hi,
>
>On Mon, 5 Mar 2007, Bill Lear wrote:
>
>> On Monday, March 5, 2007 at 12:32:07 (+0100) Johannes Schindelin writes:
>>
>> >On Mon, 5 Mar 2007, Karl Hasselström wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 2007-03-02 20:21:17 +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> > On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Karl Hasselström wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > However, given that your file timestamps have been bumped (without
>> >> > > file content changes),
>> >> >
>> >> > There were changes. Only that they have been taken back, but that is
>> >> > _another_ change.
>> >> 
>> >> Since the content is exactly the same as before, I'd be of the strong
>> >> opinion that nothing has changed as far as the make system should be
>> >> concerned.
>> >
>> >You are missing an important point here: there _was_ a change.
>> 
>> Physically, yes, the bits were changed,
>
>Yeah, I know people, who would like to change laws of physics, too.
>
>> but logically nothing has changed, at least in the scenario I outlined.
>
>But it could! Even in the scenario you outlined. If somebody (might be 
>even you yourself) pushes into your repo, under the name of the branch to 
>which you switch back to right after that. Bingo. Files changed.

Yes, they change, and so would the timestamp.  So what?

>See? That is what happens if you don't fix things the right way, you keep 
>getting problems. Yes, you can solve them in another tacky way, but you'll 
>only get different problems, then.

I never said git was "broken". I describe a usage scenario I would personally find useful.

Bill