> Todo’s are probably the only place where signing and dating the code are not horrible.
Not just todos. Also notes bringing in external context to why some code looks the way it is, because that external context can invalidate over time, and a date is then useful to evaluate whether the code needs changes.
> If the author is older then the VCS, they are no longer relevant.
You'd be surprised. Loss of VCS history happens for various reasons. In my career, I've seen one because the company switched to a different VCS. I've seen another because someone forked the project by copying out some parts of older project and committing them in a first commit of a new repo. I also worked with a codebase that's older than I am, predating Git, SVN and CVS, that someone at some point open-sourced on Github.
Not just todos. Also notes bringing in external context to why some code looks the way it is, because that external context can invalidate over time, and a date is then useful to evaluate whether the code needs changes.
> If the author is older then the VCS, they are no longer relevant.
You'd be surprised. Loss of VCS history happens for various reasons. In my career, I've seen one because the company switched to a different VCS. I've seen another because someone forked the project by copying out some parts of older project and committing them in a first commit of a new repo. I also worked with a codebase that's older than I am, predating Git, SVN and CVS, that someone at some point open-sourced on Github.