[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Proposed module, releasedate
From: |
Bruno Haible |
Subject: |
Re: Proposed module, releasedate |
Date: |
Thu, 10 Jan 2008 23:57:39 +0100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.5.4 |
James Youngman wrote:
> Don't forget that the code you are commenting about is not itself part
> of the module. ...
> This is a proposed gnulib module, it should be no
> surprise that it is not a substitute for adequate package
> documentation.
But if the main usecase of the proposed module has such a weak justification,
what is the remaining rationale for the module?
Besides that, the module is overkill: It is using the large 'getdate'
module to do something at runtime that it could also do with much less
code: conversion of a date in ISO 8601 format to a time_t.
Bruno
- Re: Proposed module, releasedate, (continued)
- Re: Proposed module, releasedate, James Youngman, 2008/01/10
- human-time? (was: Re: Proposed module, releasedate), Simon Josefsson, 2008/01/10
- Re: human-time?, Bruno Haible, 2008/01/10
- Re: human-time?, Simon Josefsson, 2008/01/10
- Re: human-time?, Simon Josefsson, 2008/01/10
- Re: human-time?, Bruno Haible, 2008/01/10
- Re: human-time?, Paul Eggert, 2008/01/10
- Re: 'make' modification time warning (was: Re: human-time?), Bruno Haible, 2008/01/10
- Re: 'make' modification time warning, Paul Eggert, 2008/01/11
- Re: 'make' modification time warning, Matthew Woehlke, 2008/01/22
- Re: Proposed module, releasedate,
Bruno Haible <=