From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2016 16:08:44 GMT
Subject: Re: topological index field for commit objects
Message-ID: <xmqqlh1lz6gj.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20160701031711.GA4832@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> So I think it would be more productive to put a check like this in "git
> commit" rather than (or perhaps in addition to) fsck. That prevents
> us creating the broken relationship, but it does still mean the user may
> have to to go back and tell the original committer that their clock was
> broken.
>
> You could also have the fsck check look not only for out-of-order
> commits, but also commits in the future (from the perspective of the
> receiver). That would reject such broken commits before they even hit
> your repository (though again, it is unclear in such a case if the
> commit is broken or the clock of the checker).

I agree 100% with the above two paragraphs.