Subject: Re: [PATCH] Additional merge-base tests

From: Jakub Narebski <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2006 13:16:22 +0200

Junio C Hamano wrote:

> The problem ALASCM's example demonstrates does rely on clock
> skews.  The timestamps used in the example looked like this:
> 
> 
>    1   1
>   /  \/  \
>  4  -1   4
>  |   |   |
>  3  -2   3
>  |   |   |
>  2  -3   2
>    \ |  /
>      0
> 
> The crucial clock skew the case relies on is that the tip of the
> middle branch (-1) is older than the common commit (0).  But the
> topmost commits with timestamp 1 could be with timestamp 5 to
> correct the clock skew and still make the example "fail".
> 
>    5   5
>   /  \/  \
>  4  -1   4
>  |   |   |
>  3  -2   3
>  |   |   |
>  2  -3   2
>    \ |  /
>      0

So would putting timestamp for merge be MAX(now, parents timestamps)
solve the problem?

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland
ShadeHawk on #git