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

Re: Support of missing/invalid dates

From: C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
Date: 2007-02-27 16:04:00 CET

Daniel Rall wrote:
>>> Subversion expects "svn:date" to be set -- it doesn't consider an
>>> empty date to be valid data.
>> Unfortunately, that's entirely untrue. You simply can't make use of
>> date-based lookups if the dates aren't present.
> Uhh Mike, you just filed a bug yourself (#2721) about 'log -r {DATE}'
> on an invalid date returning an error. "Entirely untrue" is
> inaccurrate and a bit harsh, don't'cha think?

That issue is about *bogus* dates, not *missing* ones. Subversion doesn't
care at all if a date property doesn't exist. But I sure doesn't like
trying to parse one that's misformatted.

Your statement is a little confusing in a discussion about Subversion
properties: Subversion does *not* expect svn:date to be set (NULL is fine),
but yes, it doesn't consider an *empty* date ("") to be valid data.

C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato@collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand

Received on Tue Feb 27 16:04:18 2007

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