Re: [PATCH] Additional merge-base tests

> Junio C Hamano wrote:
> 
> 
> > The problem ALASCM's example demonstrates does rely on clock
> > skews.  The timestamps used in the example looked like this:
> > 
> > 
> >    1   1
> >   /  \/  \
> >  4  -1   4
> >  |   |   |
> >  3  -2   3
> >  |   |   |
> >  2  -3   2
> >    \ |  /
> >      0
> > 
> > The crucial clock skew the case relies on is that the tip of the
> > middle branch (-1) is older than the common commit (0).  But the
> > topmost commits with timestamp 1 could be with timestamp 5 to
> > correct the clock skew and still make the example "fail".
> > 
> >    5   5
> >   /  \/  \
> >  4  -1   4
> >  |   |   |
> >  3  -2   3
> >  |   |   |
> >  2  -3   2
> >    \ |  /
> >      0
> 
> So would putting timestamp for merge be MAX(now, parents timestamps)
> solve the problem?