Re: jk/tag-contains (Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jul 2010, #05; Wed, 28))

From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Aug 2, 2010, 20:02 UTC
Message-ID: <20100802200209.GD2180@burratino>
In-Reply-To: <7vocdlpsmw.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

Junio C Hamano wrote:

> You need to be careful here, though.  What if you pulled from somebody
> whose clock is set grossly in the future?

We could check for that and give relevant advice:

 fatal: committer date <date> precedes parent date <date>
 hint: It looks like you are trying to commit on top of a commit
 hint: from 5 years into the future.
 hint: Use "git rebase -f" to rewrite the commit with a more
 hint: sensible date, and please, fix your clocks!

Show 7 quoted lines

> I wonder if we can make fsck to notice a commit with a wrong timestamp
> (i.e. older than some of its parents) and make a note of it (hopefully
> they are miniscule minority)---then during the revision traversal when we
> hit such a commit, we perhaps ignore its timestamp (pretending as if its
> timestamp is one of its children or parent---I haven't thought about the
> details, but the note fsck leaves can record what adjusted timestamp
> should be used) to fix the issue?

Thanks --- at first glance, this idea would seem to allow much faster revision limiting.