Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 12:46:49 +0800 From: Philip Paeps <philip@freebsd.org> To: marklmi@yahoo.com Cc: Ulrich =?utf-8?q?Sp=C3=B6rlein?= <uqs@freebsd.org>, Graham Perrin <grahamperrin@gmail.com>, freebsd-git <freebsd-git@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: cgit, ages and chronological order Message-ID: <FFB55106-BA73-4639-9772-0B3608B3E8DC@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <36020FD7-32A4-4869-B6A2-2622F50F6478@yahoo.com> References: <9766b3e1-fb5d-1993-46e2-057e2567315a@gmail.com> <CAJ9axoT6kEwC%2Bt5zHSKPSFgFmaOt8-CXPAG5jsanWobT4LZhpA@mail.gmail.com> <36020FD7-32A4-4869-B6A2-2622F50F6478@yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2021-11-17 06:32:52 (+0800), Mark Millard via freebsd-git wrote: > information being based on local git commit timing (and clocks) > vs. when the commits are pushed to FreeBSD servers: The display > order is from the timing on the FreeBSD servers but the Age is > based on the original commit (before the push). The longer the > delay between commit and push, the more noticeable the > distinction is. Some projects require a "git rebase --ignore-date" (or "git rebase --reset-author-date", which I consider the more obvious spelling) before pushing. A hook could potentially reject commits with timestamps that are too far off to the server's liking. I can't comment on whether we need or want either the policy or the hook or both. I don't really have a problem with the default Git behaviour here. Philip -- Philip Paeps Senior Reality Engineer Alternative Enterprises
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?FFB55106-BA73-4639-9772-0B3608B3E8DC>