Hi Peter, On Mon, 19 Feb 2018, Peter Backes wrote:
> please ensure to CC me if you reply as I am not subscribed to the list. > > https://git.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Git_FAQ#Why_isn.27t_Git_preserving_modification_time_on_files.3F > > argues that git isn't preserving modification times because it needs to > ensure that build tools work properly. > > I agree that modification times should not be restored by default, > because of the principle of least astonishment. But should it be > impossible? The principle of least astonishment does not mandate this; > it is not a paternalistic principle. > > Thus, I do not get at all > - why git doesn't *store* modification times, perhaps by default, but > at least on request > - why git doesn't restore modification times *on request* > > It is pretty annoying that git cannot, even if I know what I am doing, > and explicitly want it to, preserve the modification time. > > One use case: I have lots of file lying around in my build directory > and for some of them, the modification time in important information to > me. Those files are not at all used with the build tool. In contrast to > git pull, git pull --rebase needs those to be stashed. But after the > pull and unstash, the mtime is gone. Boo. > > Please provide options to store and restore modification times. It > shouldn't be hard to do, given that other metadata such as the mode is > already stored. It would make live so much easier. And the fact that > this has made into the FAQ clearly suggests that there are many others > who think so. Since you already assessed that it shouldn't be hard to do, you probably want to put your money where your mouth is and come up with a patch, and then offer it up for discussion on this here mailing list. Ciao, Johannes
