Karl Fogel wrote:
> Nuutti Kotivuori <naked@iki.fi> writes:
>> The repository timestamps are GMT, if they were to be let out to
>> the user as is, which is not going to happen.
>
> So what exactly is the "dubious part" about svnlook, then?
Because we are converting the timestamps from the repository format to
human display in 'svnlook' - we do it right now and we do it with the
patch I sent. Right now, 'svnlook' always generates the timestamps in
GMT - but for example 'svn info' claims it has GMT timestamps, but in
actuality they are localtime and it just doesn't print the timezone.
And btw, if you didn't notice - neither 'svnlook' or 'svn info' prints
the weekday nor the month name.
>> That was the discussion sometime back. There's the problem that if
>> the date format is customizable, then the machine parsability of
>> any output which contains dates goes down a bit. But anyway, I'd
>> suppose that's a post-1.0 issue.
>
> I can tell you right now that if the human-presentation date strings
> do not include the month name, then this becomes a pre-1.0 issue for
> me personally :-).
Wellll, maybe we can squeeze it in ;)
-- Naked
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Jun 22 22:44:49 2002