Re: [PATCH] pretty: add format specifiers for short and raw date formats

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



SZEDER Gábor <szeder@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> @@ -120,6 +120,8 @@ The placeholders are:
>  - '%at': author date, UNIX timestamp
>  - '%ai': author date, ISO 8601-like format
>  - '%aI': author date, strict ISO 8601 format
> +- '%as': author date, short format
> +- '%aR': author date, raw format

Hmmm, are these two a good things the only ones that are missing?

It makes me wonder if it's time for us to move to a more extensible
format, e.g. "%aT(...)", in which 'T' stands for 'timestamp' and the
part in the parentheses can be any format string that is understood
by "log --date=<format>" [*1*].  Once we have something like that,
we can keep the existing ones for historical convenience, stop
adding new ones [*2*] and do not have to worry about these two
mechanisms going out of sync.

Also, "%at" is almost there as a replacement for "%aR"; what we are
missing really is "%aZ" for zone offset.  If we had "%aZ", we do not
need "%aR", as that is "%at %aZ".


[Footnote]

*1* Yes, and in longer term, we should really aim to unify the
    for-each-ref format and "--pretty=format:" format.  "%aT(...)"
    is probably a step in a wrong direction, and it should probably
    be more like "%(authordate:...)".

*2* Because we have "%ad", we _can_ stop adding new ones already.



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]