On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 02:14:03PM +0300, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Stefan Sperling wrote on Sat, May 21, 2011 at 13:07:19 +0200:
> > On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:20:41PM +0300, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > > Stefan Sperling wrote on Fri, May 20, 2011 at 17:26:39 +0200:
> > > > On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 04:28:55PM +0200, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote:
> > > > > BUT, why don't we just use standardized unit letters? e.g. {-1d}
> > > > > means one day ago. Then we'd have something like
> > > > >
> > > > > [-+]<float-nr>[YyMDdHhmSs]
> > > >
> > > > What would we need the + for?
> > >
> > > (see below)
> > >
> > > > We cannot resolve future revisions.
> > > >
> > >
> > > That's a false statement.
> >
> > Can you explain why?
> > Do you mean if people set their clock to the past?
>
> Either that, or set their svn:date properties to the future.
>
> I'm basically saying that 'svn log -r {yyyy-mm-dd} file:///path/to/somewhere'
> does not depend on what the machine thinks the current time is.
Fair enough.
But I'd rather use "in 3 months" or something like that than +3m.
It's simply less cryptic.
But since we support a lot of "absolute" time formats there's no
reason why we couldn't have more than one "relative" format.
This is probably the best answer to the problem of different people
having different taste :)
Received on 2011-05-21 14:03:01 CEST