On Mon, 26 Jan 2009, Giuseppe Bilotta wrote:
> The RSS 2.0 specifications defines not one but _two_ dates for its
> channel element! Woohoo! Luckily, it seems that consensus seems to be
> that if both are present they should be equal, except for some very
> obscure and discouraged cases. Since lastBuildDate would make more sense
> for us and pubDate seems to be the most commonly used, we defined both
> and make them equal.
Perhaps it would make sense to quote RSS 2.0 standard format here
in the commit message, e.g.:
pubDate The publication date for the content in the channel.
lastBuildDate The last time the content of the channel changed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Giuseppe Bilotta <giuseppe.bilotta@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> gitweb/gitweb.perl | 4 ++++
> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gitweb/gitweb.perl b/gitweb/gitweb.perl
> index cc6d0fb..756868a 100755
> --- a/gitweb/gitweb.perl
> +++ b/gitweb/gitweb.perl
> @@ -6087,6 +6087,10 @@ XML
> "<link>$alt_url</link>\n" .
> "</image>\n";
> }
> + if (%latest_date) {
> + print "<pubDate>$latest_date{'rfc2822'}</pubDate>\n";
> + print "<lastBuildDate>$latest_date{'rfc2822'}</lastBuildDate>\n";
> + }
I think it is good approximation of intended meaning of those two
elements.
> print "<generator>gitweb v.$version/$git_version</generator>\n";
> } elsif ($format eq 'atom') {
> print <<XML;
> --
> 1.5.6.5
>
>
--
Jakub Narebski
Poland
--
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
