[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: RFC: date parser strawman

From: Max Bowsher <maxb_at_ukf.net>
Date: 2004-01-01 18:20:56 CET

Julian Reschke wrote:
> Max Bowsher wrote:
>> If YYYY/MM/DD is cheap to support, I think svn should support it -
>> cvs supports it, and svn aim to replace cvs.
> The same can be said about almost every other format. This particular
> format seems to be a particulary bad idea as it isn't a standard
> anywhere, right?

Well, it is the format used by cvs in "cvs log" output. So cvs users are
more likely to be familiar with this farmat than any of the myriad other
formats cvs allows.

> Besides, I thought the whole point was to start with the international
> standard format - ISO8601 - and to move everything else into post-1.0
> releases?

My apologies, I haven't been following the thread very closely - must have
missed that.
In which case, the question is, is the fact that cvs log uses this format
enough to make this format worthwhile for 1.0 despite this.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Jan 1 18:31:15 2004

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.