From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] Make "local" orthogonal to date format Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2015 04:05:29 -0400 Message-ID: <20150902080529.GA19248@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20150901083731.GE30659@serenity.lan> <20150901224431.GA9353@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20150902074826.GK30659@serenity.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano To: John Keeping X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Sep 02 10:05:50 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZX33G-0002Ae-36 for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 02 Sep 2015 10:05:50 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753020AbbIBIFo (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Sep 2015 04:05:44 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:53599 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752323AbbIBIFc (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Sep 2015 04:05:32 -0400 Received: (qmail 4235 invoked by uid 102); 2 Sep 2015 08:05:32 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.1) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 02 Sep 2015 03:05:32 -0500 Received: (qmail 10357 invoked by uid 107); 2 Sep 2015 08:05:35 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 02 Sep 2015 04:05:35 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 02 Sep 2015 04:05:29 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150902074826.GK30659@serenity.lan> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 08:48:26AM +0100, John Keeping wrote: > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 06:44:31PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > > [1] I do think the error message for "relative-local is nonsense" could > > perhaps be more explanatory, but I couldn't come up with any better > > wording. But if you have ideas, feel free to switch it. > > My only suggestion would be to reuse the "unknown date format: %s" > message and avoid having a special message in this case. Heh, that was what I was trying to avoid. I wanted to avoid "I do not understand our request" and have it more like "I understand what you're _trying_ to do, but it doesn't make sense". I guess "relative dates do not depend on timezones, so -local is meaningless" would be the closest thing. I don't think it is that big a deal whichever way we go, though. -Peff