Ondřej Vašík <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Documenting in getdate.texi will be enough, because that file is
>> included by coreutils.texi. Thanks!
>
> Ok, here is amended version of the patch, first two (or less) digits are
> considered as hours, TZ correction limit set to +/
Jim Meyering wrote:
> Documenting in getdate.texi will be enough, because that file is
> included by coreutils.texi. Thanks!
Ok, here is amended version of the patch, first two (or less) digits are
considered as hours, TZ correction limit set to +/-24:00, both changes
in behaviour documented in g
Ondřej Vašík <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> Where should I document current the changes? In gnulib getdate.texi
> only? Or in both gnulib and coreutils documentation?
Hi Ondřej,
Documenting in getdate.texi will be enough, because that file is
included by coreutils.texi. Thanks!
_
Hello,
Jim Meyering wrote:
> I'm a little leery of this patch, because it makes interpretation
> of UTC+dd and UTC-dd dependent on the value of dd. For dd <= 14, dd
> represents hours. Otherwise, it represents minutes. That would have
> to be documented, but seems odd enough that my reflex is to
Ondřej Vašík <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
> as discussed with Jim Meyering via IRC, I'm sending changed version of
> the patch #3 to the list. This one patch adds range to valid TZ and
> handles correctly hours when no minutes are specified (until that patch
> is UTC+14 handled incorrectly a
Hello,
as discussed with Jim Meyering via IRC, I'm sending changed version of
the patch #3 to the list. This one patch adds range to valid TZ and
handles correctly hours when no minutes are specified (until that patch
is UTC+14 handled incorrectly as UTC+0:14) and are in common range of
UTC-12 to U
