The jj git backend happens to update only one of the two timestamps. There's not a lot of talk about the author date on the jj issue tracker.
I did not dig into the history of the code, so I can't say if it was an explicit design decision or just how it was implemented. Since there hasn't been a lot of demand to change anything here, I didn't see any active discussion about the choice.
I'm talking about jj.
Did it sound like an explicit decision from jj or just being inherited from Git?
The jj git backend happens to update only one of the two timestamps. There's not a lot of talk about the author date on the jj issue tracker.
I did not dig into the history of the code, so I can't say if it was an explicit design decision or just how it was implemented. Since there hasn't been a lot of demand to change anything here, I didn't see any active discussion about the choice.
EDIT: oh I see martin has said 'we just followed git' here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45599741