mirrors/git-annex
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages 1 Wiki Activity Actions

Added a comment

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
vrs+annex@ea5fa24dbb279be61a8e50adb638bf8366300717 2018-04-05 02:11:41 +00:00 • committed by admin
parent d8af254515
commit 896f42ea15
1 changed files with 11 additions and 0 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

11
doc/bugs/file_modification_time_should_be_stored_in_exactly_one_metadata_field/comment_3_7bf423111829ec6b358c6925d012a3e2._comment Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
[[!comment format=mdwn
username="vrs+annex@ea5fa24dbb279be61a8e50adb638bf8366300717"
nickname="vrs+annex"
avatar="http://cdn.libravatar.org/avatar/74219abcec6eece8e2c9d4351c2c912c"
subject="comment 3"
date="2018-04-05T02:11:41Z"
content="""
If pure functions were part of the design anyway, why not avoid adding derived fields and introduce functions like `year()` etc instead? The semantics would be obvious (you don't assign to a function call) and existing workflows involving the year field would keep working.
As for editing the timestamp in general, I'll post an answer to <https://git-annex.branchable.com/bugs/proposal_for_timestamp_semantics/> later that should address this.
"""]]