From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sv.mirrors.kernel.org (sv.mirrors.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:45e3:2400::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66C991F44D for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2024 16:03:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=sasl header.b=XmT+Hbmt; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from smtp.subspace.kernel.org (wormhole.subspace.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sv.mirrors.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA7F8282E54 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2024 16:03:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 046BA148FEC; Fri, 12 Apr 2024 16:02:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="XmT+Hbmt" Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (pb-smtp1.pobox.com [64.147.108.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11CCA14884A for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2024 16:02:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.70 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712937771; cv=none; b=ehjKXZzeo4sa6QClxPtQ3n2Y49/e5qcEGSwG5LDZfOucBa+TbA9bO+HSIJDiNCrkkPVXloJ3z6wbDN8udmx+9UD/8RCCWN8kb6dfOU0PvKr1Lo0z4rTYZBxnbezpGfrvUl2IHU9kj0kGMOWN11/pz2ez3KA8kOMk9b7bJq6JtXs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712937771; c=relaxed/simple; bh=0ufqY/JoBVB0q2FyOcakFkEsSgkSMr3S6seaUzE8WSw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=lOGnl6Nx4g23D+Hrt9oMELKYmDKkbpUR8OoUilz2KfGmzi8KkWI9QNYbO+2J1yn/WAvUt4mN8ZkIqip7oJdhDSFu6IJjVUV1/+m7y14rcWIn98LowZ6WxLCsfNirAJRS0EJaMswXvHDT2QdTwx5rJfsj2xEH0M/4wuGRMQOWYVk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=XmT+Hbmt; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.70 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D3BB1E0AA1; Fri, 12 Apr 2024 12:02:43 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=0ufqY/JoBVB0q2FyOcakFkEsSgkSMr3S6seaUz E8WSw=; b=XmT+HbmtJBhplR+aTwiHcBApVfaIkF6ASmfcov8RvCwgw8/E8Xwlxm P7/tX3213Gy3A/vTxPE63o8LF5YK21XJYJmuQIwmJOEC7bui4Qr2TUXfBdULDgTt 0OXqyy0YRor7WF7mWwrY9kS2cuhzZ1G+yyJo8Uk5GGMZRbOygSbi4= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 340641E0AA0; Fri, 12 Apr 2024 12:02:43 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.229.118]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 844001E0A9F; Fri, 12 Apr 2024 12:02:42 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: "blanet via GitGitGadget" Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, blanet , Xing Xin Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: fix typos describing date format In-Reply-To: (blanet via GitGitGadget's message of "Fri, 12 Apr 2024 08:51:16 +0000") References: Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 09:02:41 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 181A45F4-F8E6-11EE-B9C1-78DCEB2EC81B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com "blanet via GitGitGadget" writes: > From: Xing Xin > > This commit corrects a typographical error found in both > date-formats.txt and git-fast-import.txt documentation, where the term > `email format` was mistakenly used instead of `date format`. Saying "date" is much more correct than "email" ;-). Thanks for noticing both instances. > Documentation/date-formats.txt | 2 +- > Documentation/git-fast-import.txt | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/date-formats.txt b/Documentation/date-formats.txt > index 67645cae64f..e24517c496f 100644 > --- a/Documentation/date-formats.txt > +++ b/Documentation/date-formats.txt > @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ Git internal format:: > For example CET (which is 1 hour ahead of UTC) is `+0100`. > > RFC 2822:: > - The standard email format as described by RFC 2822, for example > + The standard date format as described by RFC 2822, for example > `Thu, 07 Apr 2005 22:13:13 +0200`. RFC 2822 defines it as "date-time" (and this hasn't been updated by RFC 5322). "date" is used to specifically mean "day month year". https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2822.html#section-3.3 date-time = [ day-of-week "," ] date FWS time [CFWS] day-of-week = ([FWS] day-name) / obs-day-of-week day-name = "Mon" / "Tue" / "Wed" / "Thu" / "Fri" / "Sat" / "Sun" date = day month year So the new phrasing may get complain from pedants. Saying "The standard date-time format as described by RFC 2822" is more technically correct, but I actually wonder if we should go in the opposite, looser direction, like The timestamp format used by RFC 2822, for example ... so that we do not even pretend to use the wording they use in the RFC documents. Doing so makes it in line with "git rev-list --help" which says "--date=rfc" shows timestamps in RFC 2822 format, often found in e-mail messages. But that's minor. "date" is fine as-is. The same comment applies to the other hunk. Thanks. > diff --git a/Documentation/git-fast-import.txt b/Documentation/git-fast-import.txt > index b2607366b91..0ccede255ea 100644 > --- a/Documentation/git-fast-import.txt > +++ b/Documentation/git-fast-import.txt > @@ -303,7 +303,7 @@ and some sanity checks on the numeric values may also be performed. > with e.g. bogus timezone values. > > `rfc2822`:: > - This is the standard email format as described by RFC 2822. > + This is the standard date format as described by RFC 2822. > + > An example value is ``Tue Feb 6 11:22:18 2007 -0500''. The Git > parser is accurate, but a little on the lenient side. It is the > > base-commit: 436d4e5b14df49870a897f64fe92c0ddc7017e4c