Add a `getWorkingCopyTimestamp` function to `ArcanistRepositoryAPI`.
AbandonedPublic
Actions

Authored by joshuaspence on May 23 2014, 2:20 PM.

Details

Reviewers

epriestley

Group Reviewers

Blessed Reviewers

Summary

This function returns a timestamp for the working copy revision.

Test Plan

Tested manually by executing the raw commands in a git, hg and svn repository.

Diff Detail

Repository

rARC Arcanist

Branch

repo-timestamp

Lint

Lint Passed

Unit

Tests Passed

Build Status

Buildable 666
Build 666: [Placeholder Plan] Wait for 30 Seconds

Event Timeline

joshuaspence updated this revision to Diff 22005.May 23 2014, 2:20 PM

joshuaspence retitled this revision from to Add a `getWorkingCopyTimestamp` function to `ArcanistRepositoryAPI`..

joshuaspence updated this object.

joshuaspence edited the test plan for this revision. (Show Details)

joshuaspence added a reviewer: epriestley.

Herald added a reviewer: Blessed Reviewers. · View Herald TranscriptMay 23 2014, 2:20 PM

Herald added subscribers: Korvin, epriestley. · View Herald Transcript

Hrrm, what's the goal of this?

The behavior might be confusing if the working copy isn't clean.

Harbormaster completed remote builds in B666: Diff 22005.May 23 2014, 2:21 PM

See D9265.

I think this probably gets into a lot of sketchy territory. For example:

I think the name "working copy timestamp" is a bit misleading, as my first assumption was that it included the modification times of dirty files. We could name this something like "getMostRecentCommitOnCurrentBranchTimestamp()" to resolve this.
This probably does not work correctly in empty repositories in any of the VCSes?
I can't really think of uses for this other than D9265. Use cases I can imagine would maybe be better served with a slightly more general getCommitInformation($commit) sort of API. There's some precedent for this in getLocalCommitinformation().
(And I'm pretty sure I caught one actual issue.)

Rather than expose somewhat-misleading, sort-of-functional, maybe-not-really-that-useful public API, what do you think about hard-coding the git actions in arc version for now instead? We could generalize them eventually after developing a better use case for this, or building getCommitInformation($commit), or whatever else.