Re: Millisecond precision in timestamps?
- From
Eric S. Raymond <esr@thyrsus.com>
- Date
- Nov 28, 2012, 03:47 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20121128034700.GD1669@thyrsus.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20121128033009.GA3931@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>:
Show 6 quoted lines
> 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 > feature.
Er, well, that *is* in fact the exact reason I want it.
I didn't put it exactly that way because I didn't expect anyone here to particularly care about round-tripping like that. But remember that I do a lot of stuff with repo surgery and conversion tools.
As a matter of fact (and this list is the first to hear about it) I'm working on code right now that massages a git import stream into a Subversion dumpfile. Soon, unless I hit a blocker I'm not expecting, I'll ship it.
Yes, there will be serious limitations and unavoidable metadata loss. But in every case *except timestamps* that loss is Subversion's fault for having a weak ontology. Timestamps are the one place git doesn't hold up its end.
-- <a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>