log --date question

Danek Duvall danek.duvall at sun.com
Thu Dec 7 00:43:09 CST 2006

On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 11:05:44PM -0600, Matt Mackall wrote:

> If I understand the distinction you're trying to make, you're looking
> to talk about the dates that a changeset was pulled into a given repo.

That's correct.

> We don't keep that information. Nor do I think that there exists a
> good way to track it. As many pulls are between short-lived
> repositories or mirrors, we'd have to keep an arbitrarily deep history
> of pulls per changeset for this information to be useful.

I don't think so.  The only date I care about, at any rate (other people
would have to pipe up if this isn't what they're thinking of) is the date
as applied to a particular repo.  The idea is to be able to quickly
determine what changesets were in a repo at a given time.

Thus if you push changeset A to repo foo at 14:53, and at some point in the
future I query repo foo for, say, 14:55, then it should tell me that
changeset A was the latest added (perhaps it tells me the latest added per
branch).  But if I pull changeset A from repo foo into my repo foo-child at
15:32, then a query on repo foo-child for 14:55 wouldn't show changeset A.

What you've provided is a bit confusing to me in its usage, because
changeset timestamps can be out of order as they're applied in the repo,
even with a linear changeset graph.  It's a well-defined operation, as
you've defined it in your explanatory message; I'm just not sure it's
particularly useful.


More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list