On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 04:42:25PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > The documentation mistakenly said that the default format was > similar to RFC 2822 format and tried to specify it by enumerating > differences, which had two problems: > > * There are some more differences from the 2822 format that are not > mentioned; worse yet > > * The default format is not modeled after RFC 2822 format at all. > As can be seen in f80cd783 (date.c: add "show_date()" function., > 2005-05-06), it is a derivative of ctime(3) format. > > Stop saying that it is similar to RFC 2822, and rewrite the > description to explain the format without requiring the reader to > know any other format. > > Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > * The discussion stalled and the topic was left in limbo for a few > weeks. Let's attempt to reboot it instead of silently waiting > for a rerolled version from the original author. Thanks for keeping this moving. The proposed text looks great to me. -Peff
