<div dir="ltr">Going back a couple of steps in the conversation, I wanted to say that I am pretty convinced by the argument that silently propagating the older modtime in cases of conflict is a reasonable plan (as long as the replica contents except for modtimes are completely synced beforehand).<div><br><div>I still have a couple caveats:<div><br></div><div>* There may be corner cases where *only* the modtime of a file has changed, but not the contents (e.g., the file is always empty and whoever is using it cares only about the modtime). In such cases, choosing the older modtime would be wrong. But maybe this is such a corner case that it doesn't really exist.</div></div></div><div><br></div><div>* I am still a bit uncomfortable about propagating a lot of changes without explicit agreement / instruction from the user. It might be worth introducing a switch that says "Really propagate older modtimes", that could be used just once when upgrading from the old to the new default settings.</div><div><br></div><div>Best,</div><div><br></div><div> - Benjamin</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 3:53 PM Tõivo Leedjärv <<a href="mailto:toivol@gmail.com">toivol@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 at 19:05, Greg Troxel <<a href="mailto:gdt@lexort.com" target="_blank">gdt@lexort.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> We could ask:<br>
><br>
> is our handling of -fat appropriate for -exfat? (probably not)<br>
><br>
> is exFAT common enough, and are there standard accomodations, that we<br>
> should have an -exfat flag?<br>
><br>
> along with asking if -fat is still needed, as opposed to different<br>
> people wanting different flags.<br>
<br>
I suggest not involving -fat in the current discussion at all. -fat<br>
does not mean FAT and FAT does not imply -fat. See<br>
<a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/bcpierce00/unison/issues/638*issuecomment-1044420789__;Iw!!IBzWLUs!Ri0BLkeJ59eMDoBs5SrCfNd2TQklNcPN3etVKfJLlzBlT4ysHIjHCEnHpS8-GuRudixOoGcVizJv_JlduESJ6nYCXe0$" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/bcpierce00/unison/issues/638*issuecomment-1044420789__;Iw!!IBzWLUs!Ri0BLkeJ59eMDoBs5SrCfNd2TQklNcPN3etVKfJLlzBlT4ysHIjHCEnHpS8-GuRudixOoGcVizJv_JlduESJ6nYCXe0$</a> <br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Unison-hackers mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Unison-hackers@LISTS.SEAS.UPENN.EDU" target="_blank">Unison-hackers@LISTS.SEAS.UPENN.EDU</a><br>
<a href="https://LISTS.SEAS.UPENN.EDU/mailman/listinfo/unison-hackers" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://LISTS.SEAS.UPENN.EDU/mailman/listinfo/unison-hackers</a><br>
</blockquote></div>