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

  • From: Stephan Aßmus <superstippi@xxxxxx>
  • To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 15:55:31 +0200


On 13.05.2011 12:06, Ingo Weinhold wrote:
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.

BTW, before we would invest work to get Mercurial running perfectly in Haiku (which may not even be possible because hard-links cannot be implemented in BFS as is), "we" could look into why "lightweight" tags become a performance problem in git and contribute a fix. Just a suggestion of course... I put "we" in quotes, because I certainly don't have time to do it. Not even motivation. :-)

Best regards,

Other related posts: