On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 5:23 PM, Andrew Wolfe wrote:
> Kevin, thanks for your feedback.
>
> You have a reasonable point, because usually you don't put the outputs of a
> build into version control, but the build script checks them for being
> current.
>
> On the other hand, when you change branc
Kevin, thanks for your feedback.
You have a reasonable point, because usually you don't put the outputs of a
build into version control, but the build script checks them for being current.
On the other hand, when you change branches, your existing output directories
are worthless problems anywa
On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 03:01:10PM -0400, Andrew Wolfe wrote:
> Hi Brian,
>
> Not completely sure what you're saying. If the files on master are
> not changed, the changed files' commit timestamps will be older than
> the branch commit timestamps.
>
> However, if I check out master after committ
Hi Brian,
Not completely sure what you're saying. If the files on master are not
changed, the changed files' commit timestamps will be older than the branch
commit timestamps.
However, if I check out master after committing to a branch, the modifications
will necessarily disappear because the
On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 01:18:10PM -0400, Andrew Wolfe wrote:
> I would like to propose that the checkout process set the create and
> modification times of a file to the timestamp at which a file was committed.
The reason Git doesn't do this is pretty simple: make and various other
tools do rebu
5 matches
Mail list logo
