Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: patch logs not rfc(2)822 compatible

[David Allouche]

On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 04:09:54PM -0700, Jeremy Shaw wrote:
> Miles Bader wrote:
> > 
> > [Note that for the Date: field, I personally think the current
> > situation (with two headers) is sort of silly, and would have
> > preferred _just_ the Standard-Date: header -- called "Date:" -- with
> > a time-zone indicator.  But it's too late without lots of
> > backward-compatibility hacks.  If you're writing a parser, then
> > you've got to deal with the existing situation, no matter what
> > changes in the future.]
> 
> Agreed. As I mentioned in my original message, fixing the bug just
> creates more headaches (needing to know two formats). So it's probably
> best to just note in the docs that while the patch format is nearly
> RFC2822 compatable, the following differences have been observed.

I was about to start a new section "Incompatible archive format changes"
on the "Discuss Arch features" on the Wiki, but then I noticed the
appropriate page already exists:

http://wiki.gnuarch.org/moin.cgi/Archive_20Format_203_20Wishlist

Added a bullet point about rfc2822 mostly-compliance.

-- 
                                                            -- ddaa