Re: [RFH] revision limiting sometimes ignored
- From
- Tilman Sauerbeck <tilman@code-monkey.de>
- Date
- Feb 6, 2008, 16:43 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20080206164303.GA1255@code-monkey.de>
- In-Reply-To
- <alpine.LFD.1.00.0802051539570.2967@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Linus Torvalds [2008-02-05 15:59]:
Hi guys, thanks for looking into this.
Show 21 quoted lines
> On Tue, 5 Feb 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > > > > - make commit warn if any parent commit date is in the future from the > > > current commit date (allow a *small* fudge factor here, say 5 minutes). > > > > 5 minutes seems a little narrow to me. I think we can even go with 86400 > > seconds. > > Well, notice how I said *warn*. Not abort the commit. Not stop. Just make > people very aware of the fact that clocks are skewed. > > In the case that actually triggered this whole discussion, the problem > seems to sadly have been in the original CVS tree (or whatever it was > imported from): the project started in 2006, had lots of regular commits > up to October 2007, and then suddenly it had a commit that had a date in > 2002! > > [ For those interested in looking at this, the broken commit in that > Tilman's repo was commit 3a7340af2bd57488f832d7070b0ce96c4baa6b54, which > is from October 2002, and which is surrounded by commits from October > 2007, so somebody was literally off by five years ]
I'm not sure whether this repository was import from another SCM, but I doubt it. I'm fairly sure that 3a7340af2bd57488f832d7070b0ce96c4baa6b54 was created using git commit though. I guess the committer's clock just was a little late at that point.
Regards, Tilman
-- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?