From nobody Wed Jan 3 23:32:27 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-current@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4T55bv5zVzz56xyQ for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2024 23:32:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brooks@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net) Received: from spindle.one-eyed-alien.net (spindle.one-eyed-alien.net [199.48.129.229]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4T55bv5Xc5z4p4S; Wed, 3 Jan 2024 23:32:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brooks@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: by spindle.one-eyed-alien.net (Postfix, from userid 3001) id 4BBC73C019A; Wed, 3 Jan 2024 23:32:27 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2024 23:32:27 +0000 From: Brooks Davis To: Bakul Shah Cc: Jamie Landeg-Jones , FreeBSD Current , yuri@freebsd.org Subject: Re: git repo port issues? Message-ID: References: <202401031913.403JDZBt028036@donotpassgo.dyslexicfish.net> <46C8698A-A004-4B5F-9107-6D9FD3685074@iitbombay.org> List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46C8698A-A004-4B5F-9107-6D9FD3685074@iitbombay.org> X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4T55bv5Xc5z4p4S X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:36236, ipnet:199.48.128.0/22, country:US] On Wed, Jan 03, 2024 at 03:09:15PM -0800, Bakul Shah wrote: > On Jan 3, 2024, at 11:22???AM, Brooks Davis wrote: > > > > Nothing about dates is centralized in git, but some server side checks > > could be implemented on CommitDate. IMO we should require that > > CommitDate be >= the previous one and less than "now". > > Given that git commit objects form a DAG, I don't see how you can > impose linearity. Check each commit in a push to ensure that its CommitDate is newer than its first parent's CommitDate (you could check them all, but as a project we're mostly linear). Seems like a pretty trivial property to enforce. -- Brooks