[haiku-development] Re: Mercurial version string Was:Re: Re: VOTE: Git or Mercurial (hg) as Haiku's new source control tool

  • From: Ingo Weinhold <ingo_weinhold@xxxxxx>
  • To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 12:06:01 +0200

On 2011-05-13 at 04:15:37 [+0200], Jon Yoder <darkwyrm@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 05/12/2011 09:39 AM, Ingo Weinhold wrote:
> > Do the tools even store times with that precision? At least a simple
> > "log" only produces full seconds with either. git's --date=raw option
> > (which I'd expect to show what is actually stored) produces what
> > looks like a number of seconds since some point in time.
> I use Mercurial all the time, but I don't go too far in depth typically
> so I can't say for sure, but I doubt it. I was thinking more along the
> lines of adding a tag to each revision with the output of the date
> command. It could offer sufficient precision that including the hash
> would be unnecessary. I could just be completely out in left field on
> this one, but it was just a thought.

If adding a tag to each revision were an option, we could just as well tag 
with svn-like revision numbers. That had been proposed for git (via 
lightweight tags; hg doesn't seem to have an equivalent), but it turned out 
to have performance issues.

CU, Ingo

Other related posts: