Jeff Johnson wrote: > Should the date in %changelog also be changed?
You mean for the .spec input ? Wouldn't that invalidate all spec files, unless it's made "optional" (either/or) ? Well, I live in a civilized country which uses ISO dates... But there's plenty of "middle-endian" date formats in use. > Or leave bad enuf alone for status quo ante "compatibility"? The big problem with the timestamps isn't the order, but the lack of a timezone. Usually meaning "localtime", but... For the YAML timestamp, I think a missing timezone _might_ be interpreted as UTC which means the day could be off by one. > BTW, RPM got reamed years ago because %changelog isn't "standard", been > on my todo++ since forever. The "author" fields are also horribly abused since forever, but seperating out the release at this point might be hard ? But for the timestamp I was just going with "canonical", seems like if you use a space it means "1 date + 1 time". --anders ______________________________________________________________________ RPM Package Manager http://rpm5.org Developer Communication List rpm-devel@rpm5.org
