Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   see shy jo (joeyh@hachyderm.io)'s status on Monday, 01-Apr-2024 10:56:38 JST see shy jo

   anyone know of a common #git workflow that would result in 4 commits with 2 separate authors all having one timestamp as a common commit timestamp and a second timestamp as a common author timestamp?

   • Embed this notice
     see shy jo (joeyh@hachyderm.io)'s status on Monday, 01-Apr-2024 10:56:36 JST see shy jo

     in reply to

     Checked all xz commit timestamps for similar patterns. first is a series of commits by Jia Tan on Jan 19, then another Jan 22, then Lasse has a series on Feb 9, then a long series that includes the commits mentioned above, then 3 more series by Lasse on Feb 17 and Feb 29. This certainly seems unusual.

     but, I do find similar things in git.git history, Junio has a workflow that results in that legitinately

     This suggests to me that xz's git workflow changed in January.

     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     see shy jo (joeyh@hachyderm.io)'s status on Monday, 01-Apr-2024 10:56:37 JST see shy jo

     in reply to

     a rebase would explain the common commit timestamps, but it preserves author timestamp

     this seems a little suspicious, but maybe there is some other workflow that explains it

     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     see shy jo (joeyh@hachyderm.io)'s status on Monday, 01-Apr-2024 10:58:02 JST see shy jo

     in reply to

     • cesarb

     @cesarb hmm, good point git am en masse followed by a rebase. If you also did a git am of your own patches in addition to the other persons's

     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     cesarb (cesarb@fosstodon.org)'s status on Monday, 01-Apr-2024 10:58:06 JST cesarb

     in reply to

     @joeyh I haven't checked, but my first guess would be some kind of email-based workflow.