Re: RFC: date parser rewrite

On Fri, 2003-12-19 at 15:44, kfogel@collab.net wrote:
> Reason 2: There are post-1.0 compatibility strategies that make this
> change less compelling. For one thing, any new parser we
> write is going to intersect with some of what the current
> parser supports. We can then look at current side of the
> non-intersecting area and see how important some of those
> formats really are.

I don't think that's a feasible strategy. We have no way of collecting
data on who is using what date formats; the only thing we can do is
break them and see who complains bitterly about their scripts failing
when they upgraded.

(I think the non-thread-safety of the current date parser is a pretty
strong argument too. I hadn't thought of that before.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Dec 20 00:06:56 2003