From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Shawn O. Pearce" Subject: Re: git stash list shows timestamp in stead of "stash number", when setting date = local for log in config Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 15:29:20 -0700 Message-ID: <20090925222920.GZ14660@spearce.org> References: <49578b170909150756k3c19912dv28615053a6bd0f7d@mail.gmail.com> <20090924070121.GD24486@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Alf Kristian St??yle , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Sep 26 00:29:59 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MrJIb-0004Dj-Cb for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Sep 2009 00:29:57 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753069AbZIYW3S (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Sep 2009 18:29:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753058AbZIYW3R (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Sep 2009 18:29:17 -0400 Received: from george.spearce.org ([209.20.77.23]:60481 "EHLO george.spearce.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753004AbZIYW3Q (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Sep 2009 18:29:16 -0400 Received: by george.spearce.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 2D59838151; Fri, 25 Sep 2009 22:29:20 +0000 (UTC) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090924070121.GD24486@coredump.intra.peff.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jeff King wrote: > On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 04:56:41PM +0200, Alf Kristian St??yle wrote: > > When doing a "git stash list" I get this strange stash record: > > stash@{Tue Sep 15 16:28:12 2009}: WIP on master: 2262276 ... > > > > I have a global config setting on log: > > > > [log] > > date = local > > > > If setting the date config to default or removing the setting, the > > stash record looks correct: > > stash@{0}: WIP on master: 2262276 ... > > The patch below implements the former. The only downside I can think of > is if somebody is relying on "log.date" to set the output format for > reflogs, because they really like the date version better. In that case, > I think we should wait for them to complain (which I doubt will happen), > and then add a log.reflogDates config option to appease them. > > Shawn, reflogs are your thing. Any comments? I agree. I doubt anyone is relying on log.date to reformat the output of `git reflog show` or `git stash list`, so this is probably a reasonable change to make. Even if they were trying to use that, its a bug. Care to wrap this up in a patch? -- Shawn.