From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 23:57:46 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make reflog query '@{1219188291}' act as '@{2008/08/19 16:24:51}'
Message-ID: <7vskt0woat.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <20080819234433.GJ24212@spearce.org>

"Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce.org> writes:

> The value 1112911993 was chosen for the limit as it is the commit
> timestamp for e83c516331 "Initial revision of "git" ...". Any
> reflogs in existance should contain timestamps dated later than
> the date Linus first stored Git into itself, as reflogs came about
> quite a bit after that.
>
> Additionally a reflog with 1,112,911,993 record entries is also
> simply not valid.  Such a reflog would require at least 87 TB to
> store just the old and new SHA-1 values.  So our randomly chosen
> upper limit for @{nth} notation is "big enough" that users will
> not run into it by accident.

Hmm, would we want to apply that logic to replace the magic "8-digit" rule
in date.c::match_digit()?