Re: Ok to use cvs keywords for date and revision?

["Greg Ferguson" <gferg@hoop.timonium.sgi.com>]

On Jan 15,  9:59am, David Lawyer wrote:
> Subject: Re: Ok to use cvs keywords for date and revision?
> > 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?

YYYY-MM-01 I suppose YYYY-MM would work, but I would need to verify.

> 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).

The software we use to process can handle a multitude of formats.
YYYY-MM-DD is now the documented way of supplying the date.
"DD <month> YYYY" would be ok, but I would not make that widely
known :-)

--

btw, all discussions should move to "discuss@linuxdoc.org". I'd urge
people to unsubscribe from the old list(s; ldp-<foo>@lists.linuxdoc.org)
and use the new lists (http://www.linuxdoc.org/mailinfo.html). fyi.

r,

-- 
Greg Ferguson     - s/w engr / mtlhd         | gferg at sgi.com
SGI Tech Pubs     - http://techpubs.sgi.com/ |
Linux Doc Project - http://www.linuxdoc.org/ | gferg at metalab.unc.edu


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org