discuss: Re: Ok to use cvs keywords for date and revision?
Subject:
Re: Ok to use cvs keywords for date and revision?
From:
David Lawyer ####@####.####
Date:
16 Jan 2001 07:45:45 -0000
Message-Id: <200101160745.f0G7jhN95003@zoon.lafn.org>
I sent this to discuss but it bounced claiming that I hadn't
subscribed. So I resubscribed and am resending it.
> On Jan 4, 10:51am, Mark Komarinski wrote:
> > Subject: Re: Ok to use cvs keywords for date and revision?
> > "Robert B. Easter" wrote:
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 10:55:04AM -0500, Greg Ferguson wrote:
> I'm pretty sure we did decide (at least it seemed like a quorum)...
> The ISO "YYYY-MM-DD" format should be used. The templates will
> reflect that (soon) and we should put that in the LDP AG (if it
> isn't already specified).
What does one use if they want to only use the month? The advantage
of spelling out the name of the month (and leaving out the day) is
that it's easier to remember. For example, August 2000 is much easier
to read and remember than 2000-8-9. Thus I'm opposed to the new way
to list dates. But if others insist, would it be feasible to list the
date both ways? Say: August 2000 (2000-8-9). Or optionally: August
9, 2000 (2000-8-9).
While some people may remember months as numbers, most people think of
them by name. That's why it's important to show the name of the
month. The need for remembering the approximate date is so that one
may check for newer versions without needing to make a note of the
version number. Also, one likes to know about how out-of-date the doc
is.
> Please, no more beating that dead horse! :-}
It's not dead yet :-)
David Lawyer
