3 ms·
yeah... somebody needs to always make sure not to be the bigger fool... 1) Git commits have timestamps. 2) Proving I did on company laptop is their onus. Innoc
by _6lik 5y ago
yeah... somebody needs to always make sure not to be the bigger fool...
1) Git commits have timestamps.
2) Proving I did on company laptop is their onus. Innocent until proven guilty. ;-P
3) I do that. Along with randomisation of sample data. but yeah, you make a very important point in general. 99% of people get screwed on such things.
4) If I do something using company laptop, it is bound to be logged somewhere. All my git visits are also logged and archived for 10 years as per law. So proving I did it using company laptop is easy and it is them who have to prove it. And a foolish lawyer is a dream come true because then I can keep dismissing his every argument as wasting the learned court's time.
But yes, keeping things straight forward is always a better idea.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- GauntletWizard 5y agogit commit --amend --date="Wed Feb 16 14:00 2011 +0100" --no-edit Certain proponents of Fossil and Mercurial will tell you that this is an advantage of those systems - They're fooling themselves, because you can make those edits, there's just not nice tooling for them.
- _6lik 5y agoSo I guess it works in my favor because I own the git repo. There's always something, isn't it. I can change my git timestamps and the employer can change its server log timestamps if there's maleficence at either side. That's a completely different territory then.