Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 07:52:32 -0500 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: Ulrich, Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz>, "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@berklix.com>, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RFC regarding usage of ISO 8601 throughout the tree Message-ID: <201101060752.32539.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <4D250159.30108@quip.cz> References: <20110105132155.GO23329@acme.spoerlein.net> <20110105194748.GS23329@acme.spoerlein.net> <4D250159.30108@quip.cz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday, January 05, 2011 6:40:09 pm Miroslav Lachman wrote:
> Ulrich Sp=F6rlein wrote:
> > On Wed, 05.01.2011 at 19:00:31 +0100, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> >> Ulrich =3D?utf-8?B?U3DDtnJsZWlu?=3D wrote:
> >>> !ACHTUNG BIKESHED ALERT!
> >>>
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>> With the recent changes to the committer graphs, I again was reminded
> >>> how much I hate the YYYY/MM/DD format (I can't help it ...). Given th=
at
> >>
> >> I guess& hope you mean you like linear decreasing order but
> >> dislike '/' as a delimeter& want to swap from '/' to '-' as in ISO ?
> >
> > Exactly.
> >
> >>> this almost looks like ISO 8601, but is an unreadable variant of it, I
> >>> would like to aggressively change this throughout the tree.
> >>>
> >>> I'd like to start with minor stuff like share/misc/*.dot. Then probab=
ly
> >>> src/UPDATING, and ports/UPDATING after I've identified the consumers =
of
> >>> these docs.
> >>
> >> Do you mean you would like to swap eg src/UPDATING 20100720 to eg
> >> 2010-07-20 ? That would be more readable.
> >
> > Yes, I think for lists of dates like in UPDATING or automatically
> > generated date output like syslogd, the ISO8601 format only has
> > advantages.
>=20
> I am using ISO8601 date + time format for years in my scripts, logs=20
> etc., so it would be nice to have it on all places of FreeBSD as a=20
> standard format.
> I think 2010-07-20 is really readable than 20100720 or 2010/07/20 and=20
> "2011-01-06 00:03:50" is better than "Jan 6 00:03:50" (in logs)
Changing the format of syslog messages is guaranteed to break ${INFINITY}=20
scripts and other log parsing tools. I think that is too large of a POLA=20
violation to justify.
I also don't find the format used in UPDATING that hard to read as I use it=
on=20
an almost daily basis myself. Given that the format in UPDATING is already=
=20
compliant, this mostly seems to be a gratuitous change.
=2D-=20
John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201101060752.32539.jhb>