Re: git: uh-oh

On Mon, Sep 06, 2010 at 05:41:06AM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> writes:
> >> CVS does not record when a branch was created or by whom.  If a
> >> git commit has to be created for such events, cvs2git attributes
> >> them to a configurable username, which Max has set to be "pgsql".
> >> It chooses the latest possible timestamp that is consistent with
> >> other (timestamped) changesets that depend on it.
> > 
> >> Does cvs2cl do something better?  If so, how?
> > 
> > I suspect what it's doing is attributing the branch creation to
> > the user who makes the first commit on the branch for that file.
> > In general I'd expect that to give a reasonable result --- better
> > than choosing a guaranteed-to-be-wrong constant value anyway ;-)
> 
> On the contrary, I prefer an obvious indication of "I don't know"

Surely you jest!  Databases have no possible way of recording
ignorance (other than NULL, that is ;)

Cheers,
David.
-- 
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778  AIM: dfetter666  Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter      XMPP: david.fetter@gmail.com
iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate