Michael Brouwer wrote:
> What might be even better is to always do a less than with the value
> the user specified plus 1. If the date is the end of a range. And a
> greater or equal of the specified value with all unspecified fields set
> to 0 if the date is at the start or a range.
>
> For the end of a range this would mean:
>
> -r{2005} would find the first date < 2006
> -r{2005-05} would find the first date < 2005-06
> -r{2005-05-12} would find the first date < 2005-05-13
> -r{2005-05-12 07} would find the first date < 2005-05-12 08
> -r{2005-05-12 07:13} would find the first date < 2005-05-12 07:14
> -r{2005-05-12 07:13:12} would find the first date < 2005-05-12 07:13:13
> -r{2005-05-12 07:13:12.22} would find the first date < 2005-05-12
> 07:13:12.23
>
> Although this is a slight change in behavior I think it solves the
> problem here are gives the user a more intuitive experience.
Actually, I think that is not the behavior that I would want as it changes
the rules. The goal of what I was saying was to just address the issue of
the user being confused by the fact that SVN LOG does not give the exact
timestamp but just up to the seconds.
In other cases, for example, if I do give you just a date, I don't think I
would want something committed at 23:59 on that date since it is unlikely
that it was in effect during that day. It also drastically breaks the behavior
of the current system - a behavior that has been documented for a long time
and which a number of people depend on.
Sometimes solving a problem does not mean trying to apply the solution
outside of the scope of the problem.
--
Michael Sinz Technology and Engineering Director/Consultant
"Starting Startups" mailto:michael.sinz@sinz.org
My place on the web http://www.sinz.org/Michael.Sinz
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Sep 1 18:09:18 2005