Re: Proposed module, releasedate

[Bruno Haible]

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