From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC17A158089 for ; Thu, 21 Sep 2023 21:49:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6CE472BC0B8; Thu, 21 Sep 2023 21:49:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (woodpecker.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 23FD92BC01C for ; Thu, 21 Sep 2023 21:49:48 +0000 (UTC) References: <5b5dfbfd-9c7d-a26b-65e7-9f8c5e48bb8f@gentoo.org> User-agent: mu4e 1.10.6; emacs 30.0.50 From: Sam James To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Standard parsable format for profiles/package.mask file Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2023 22:48:34 +0100 Organization: Gentoo In-reply-to: Message-ID: <87msxfjix6.fsf@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Archives-Salt: 0c36f076-dc4e-4d26-acec-d5c98afef24c X-Archives-Hash: ef10dd5f91719aac4b9bb273f4e5ad5f Ulrich Mueller writes: > [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]] >>>>>> On Thu, 21 Sep 2023, Florian Schmaus wrote: > >>> The first line of the "#"-prefixed explanation block must be of the >>> format "${AUTHOR_NAME} <${EMAIL}> (${SINGLE_DATE})" when the date is of >>> format YYYY-MM-DD, in UTC timezone. >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >> Can we drop this? Or, at least, relax this. > > I think UTC makes a lot of sense in an international context like ours. > It also avoids flapping of the date between entries (i.e. a newer entry > having an older date than the previous one). Yes, I don't think we need to punish people for getting it wrong, but at the same time, I'd like us to standardise on UTC - saying this as someone who isn't in UTC half of the year. That means others are free to correct it if they notice it's the wrong date and so on. >> I usually just enter my locale date here and like to avoid having to >> think about that UTC is potentially in a different date. I also can >> not remember any situation where the date being in UTC matters. Plus, >> if you want accurate timestamps, then the git commit/author date is >> here for you. :) Users consume p.mask entries directly rather than via git.