Re: [PATCH] Additional merge-base tests
- From
- Josef Weidendorfer <josef.weidendorfer@gmx.de>
- Date
- Jul 5, 2006, 08:39 UTC
- Message-ID
- <200607051039.53288.Josef.Weidendorfer@gmx.de>
- In-Reply-To
- <7v8xn9gjh5.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
On Tuesday 04 July 2006 23:15, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 8 quoted lines
> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes: > > > We could introduce a time.maximumSkew variable, and just walk only > > that much further when traversing the commits. > > We could have had "commit generation number" in the commit > object header, and use that instead of commit timestamps for > these traversal purposes.
Isn't this "commit generation number" information that can be regenerated on the fly, i.e. a perfect fit for data to be stored in a persistant cache, e.g. in ".git/tmp/virtual-commit-timestamps"?
Josef