[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] minor patch-log file format questions
From: |
Tom Lord |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] minor patch-log file format questions |
Date: |
Fri, 22 Aug 2003 09:16:26 -0700 (PDT) |
> From: Miles Bader <address@hidden>
> (1) Why are empty headers included?
No particular reason.
> (2) If you use commit's -L option, why is the single description line
> repeated twice, once in the Summary: line, and once in the log body?
> I think it should just be in the summary line (with the log body
> either being empty, or containing the merge record stuff).
I don't think it matters much. This format is easier to read when
you're skipping past the headers just to look at the body of a log
message.
> (3) Why are there two date headers? I think the ISO-ish format date is
> nicer, but why not just put that in the Date: header, and drop the
> Standard-date: header?k
I don't know of any programs, yet, that actually use "Standard-date:"
but that's the intention -- to provide an easy-to-parse, easy-to-use
universal time code.
"Date:" is just whatever "pretty format" your system happens to
produce, in the timezone of the committer.
-t