Re: Small trivial annoyance with the nice new builtin "git am"

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 05:37:08PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>> > and then to sprinkle calls liberally through builtin-ified programs when
>> > they move from one unit of work to the next.
>> 
>> Maybe we can just add it to the end of commit_tree_extended(), and
>> just say "the cache is reset between commits".
>> 
>> That way there is no sprinking in random places.
>
> Hmm, yeah, that might work. As you mentioned, there are cases where we
> really do want the timestamps to match (especially between author and
> committer). So we would not want this reset to kick in where callers
> would not want it.
>
> So I'm trying to play devil's advocate and think of a case where
> somebody would not want the time reset after creating a commit.
>
> One obvious impact would be reflog entries, since we would reset the
> time between the object creation and the ref write (so your reflog entry
> would sometimes be a second or more after the commit time it writes).
> I'm not sure how much anybody _cares_ about that; they're much less
> intimate than author/committer times.

As long as it is understood that a commit object is created and then
a ref is updated to point at it in this order, I do not think there
is any confusion on the party who reads the reflog, I would think.