Re: [RFC/PATCH] git.spec: fix changelog dates

[Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>]

Remi Galan Alfonso venit, vidit, dixit 05.04.2016 14:28:
> Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net> wrote:
>> A few changelog entries have inconsistent dates, which rpmlint reports
>> as errors.
>>
>> Fix them based on these assumptions:
>> - It's easier to mistype a number than a weekday abbreviation.
>> - changelog date must be before git commit date
>> - The mistyped date is just a few days off.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
>> ---
>> I dunno if this is worthwhile, but rpmlint is the first thing we tell
>> packagers and reviewers to check.
>>
>>  git.spec.in | 8 ++++----
>>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/git.spec.in b/git.spec.in
>> index bfd1cfb..eb581a3 100644
>> --- a/git.spec.in
>> +++ b/git.spec.in
>> @@ -229,7 +229,7 @@ rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
>>  * Sat Jan 30 2010 Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
>>  - We don't ship Python bits until a real foreign scm interface comes.
>>  
>> -* Mon Feb 04 2009 David J. Mellor <dmellor@whistlingcat.com>
>> +* Mon Feb 02 2009 David J. Mellor <dmellor@whistlingcat.com>
>>  - fixed broken git help -w after renaming the git-core package to git.
>>  
>>  * Fri Sep 12 2008 Quy Tonthat <qtonthat@gmail.com>
>> @@ -262,7 +262,7 @@ rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
>>  * Thu Jun 21 2007 Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
>>  - Added documentation files for git-gui
>>  
>> -* Tue May 13 2007 Quy Tonthat <qtonthat@gmail.com>
>> +* Sun May 13 2007 Quy Tonthat <qtonthat@gmail.com>
> 
> It is inconsistent with what you said in the commit message ("It's
> easier to mistype a number than a weekday abbreviation.").
> 
> Following that logic, it should be:
> 	* Tue May 15 2007 Quy Tonthat <qtonthat@gmail.com>
> 
> (or 08, I didn't check the condition "changelog date must be before
> git commit date")

I did.

The thing is that you can't always fulfill all of these 3 conditions.
"Easier" doesn't mean that the other case is impossible, just less likely.

> Thanks,
> Rémi
>