gzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22172
[lang] DateUtils.parseCVS behavior parsing "h:mm z"
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
>
To: "'Jakarta Commons Developers List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 11:06 PM
Subject: RE: [lang] DateUtils.parseCVS
Does anyone care either way that the code is in DateUtils/DateUtilsTestCase
commented out? Should it be moved to a sandbox? Or a
That does make things a little clearer. Perhaps it should be it's own
class, with a parse and a format method, a la SimpleDateFormat.
>
> Ahh.
>
> I like the yesterday etc part, but name definitely needs to change. Also I
> would want a formatter for it (somehow) so we can turn a Date into
> 'ye
Ahh.
I like the yesterday etc part, but name definitely needs to change. Also I
would want a formatter for it (somehow) so we can turn a Date into
'yesterday', '9 days ago' etc.
Hen
On Tue, 6 Jul 2004, Serge Knystautas wrote:
> Gary Gregory wrote:
> > I am not that crazy with anything of the f
Gary Gregory wrote:
I am not that crazy with anything of the form "parseProduct". What if
there was, or surely going to be 2, then 10 such methods for CVS. Then a
CvsUtils or some such class would be better. Does this belongs in a
separate class if not in the sandbox?
Sorry for not jumping into thi
ns of better men than himself." John Stuart Mill.
> -Original Message-
> From: Stephen Colebourne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2004 2:57 PM
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [lang] DateUtils.parseCVS
>
ld be better. Does this belongs in a
separate class if not in the sandbox?
2c,
Gary
> -Original Message-
> From: Steven Caswell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, July 05, 2004 08:23
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [lang] DateUtils.parseCVS
>
> Regarding iss
ginal Message-
> From: Steven Caswell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, July 05, 2004 08:23
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [lang] DateUtils.parseCVS
>
> Regarding issue
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22172, I
> seem to recall that parseCVS was o
Regarding issue http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22172, I
seem to recall that parseCVS was omitted in 2.0 primarily due to not having
an answer about parsing a format such as "h:mm z". Since cvs doesn't parse a
time in this format, I propose that parseCVS not be able to parse it ei
gzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22172
[lang] DateUtils.parseCVS behavior parsing "h:mm z"
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-07-04 16:14 ---
Since cvs doesn't parse just a time, maybe parseCVS shoul
gzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22172
[lang] DateUtils.parseCVS behavior parsing "h:mm z"
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-07-04 05:04 ---
cvs log -d '23:50 EST' NOTICE.txt
cvs [log aborted]: Can't parse date/time: 23:50 EST
However, if parseCVS can handl
gzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22172
[lang] DateUtils.parseCVS behavior parsing "h:mm z"
Summary: [lang] DateUtils.parseCVS behavior parsing "h:mm z"
Product: Commons
Version: unspecified
Platform: PC
OS/Version: Windows XP
Stat
12 matches
Mail list logo
