From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] --format=pretty: new modifiers cID, cIS, CIY Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2008 15:29:27 -0800 Message-ID: <7vabmk8dd4.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <7vir188ej4.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <96032.15671.qm@web39506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Tommy Thorn X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Feb 02 00:30:29 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JL5L2-0001mI-HI for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sat, 02 Feb 2008 00:30:28 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762353AbYBAX3k (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Feb 2008 18:29:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1762346AbYBAX3k (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Feb 2008 18:29:40 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:35209 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761620AbYBAX3i (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Feb 2008 18:29:38 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-quonix (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F59A24F0; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 18:29:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE6E424EF; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 18:29:34 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <96032.15671.qm@web39506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> (Tommy Thorn's message of "Fri, 1 Feb 2008 15:16:12 -0800 (PST)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Tommy Thorn writes: > [resent, sorry] > > --- Junio C Hamano wrote: >> I think we would very much prefer, instead of >> piling hacks on top of the originally supported >> "minimum set", to introduce a truly extensible >> syntax, like: > > I concur, but pretty-please make it a super set of > date(1) to the extent possible. It will lessen the > confusion. > > Maybe something like "%c(%Y-%m-%d %H:%M) ...", eg. > such > that if `date +' is legal, so is > "%c()". Please read what you are replying to again. If you said the above with %cT(...), it might have made some sense (but then how are you differentiate between local and original timezone?), but %c(...) needs to show not just the timestamp.