Greg Hudson wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 11:46 -0500, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
>
>>On 5/31/06, Johnathan Gifford <jgifford@wernervas.com> wrote:
>>
>>>So your saying that the revision that is out of the date range is correct?
>>>
>>
>>Yes. Whenever you use -r{DATE} for *any* command, the DATE gets
>>converted into a single revision number. Specifically, it gets
>>converted into whatever the 'latest' revision number is on that date.
>
>
> There's something to be said for doing this differently when the {DATE}
> is the first revision in a range, and rounding up rather than down. But
> we may have missed the boat on that without disrupting people's
> expectations.
It's not just about whether the date is the first or second in the list, but
also about the directionality of the range specified. Given -r{X}:{Y}, you
want {X} to be the first revision on that date if X < Y (or, older than Y),
the last revision on that date otherwise.
But it's more complex that that, even. Today, we would convert a date of
"2006-05-28" to "2006-05-08 00:00:00 UTC". But again, depending on the
directionality involved, you might instead want that to be "2006-05-28
23:59:59 UTC".
And no, I've *no idea* if "directionality" is actually a word.
--
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato@collab.net>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
Received on Wed May 31 19:13:36 2006