Re: [PATCH] Unify human represented timestamp formats.

Karl Fogel <kfogel@newton.ch.collab.net> writes:
> Something of a bikeshed <shrug>. But if we can just use one stringy
> time format, for both storage and human presentation, that's a win.

By the way, I realize there's a slight contradiction in what I've been
advocating:

   - On the one hand, I'm saying let's have at least weekday name in
     human-readable date strings (and possibly month names as well)

   - On the other hand, I'm saying let's try to use the format for
     both human readable dates and dates that are stored as strings
     (for example, as revision properties in the repository).

Personally, I don't have any issue with storing a few extra bytes per
string (that is, having weekday names in the repository strings). But
that's less important. If the storage format is not easily readable,
that's not a showstopper. If we even want to use 'T' instead of space
in those strings, that's okay -- I'd like to understand the point of
the 'T', but in any case, it's parseable either way, so no problem.

My real priority is the first one: make default human-presentation
strings as readable as possible, which means including the weekday
name and (IMHO) possibly the month name as well. The
behind-the-scenes storage format doesn't have to be pretty, I agree.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Jun 22 22:11:50 2002