[ann/rfc] bzr-diff-revid

[Benjamin Jansen]

On Jan 16, 2009, at 12:02 AM, Colin D Bennett wrote:

<snip>

> However, I would not want to see it replace the current, standard diff
> output format.  I consider it an enormously important feature that
> 'bzr diff' produces output compatible with Unix diff.  Non-bzr users
> would certainly be confused by seeing the 'revid:...' if you send them
> the diff, even it the 'patch' command accepted it.

Yeah, I assumed changing the default output would not be acceptable.

> I think a plugin is the proper location for this feature.

Okay, that's fine.

>> [2]
>> In one specific case, the revision's date was "2008-12-30 13:24:25".
>> To actually see the new file contents for the revision, I had to ask
>> bzr for date:"2008-12-31 08:32:32".
>
> That is weird.  Could it be caused by differing time zones?  I think
> this should be looked into.  Could it be a bzr bug?

As you say, time zones are an issue. Based on my, admittedly limited,  
experience, ``bzr diff'' outputs UTC timestmaps, or at least always  
includes an offset. However, when I pass a date: revspec to bzr, it  
seems to want timestamps in local time and ignores the offset field.  
Maybe I am doing something wrong. In any case, I patched Review Board  
to work with those constraints. The real problem came when date: did  
something nonsensical.

In this case, I don't think it is a zone problem, since the minute &  
second fields are completely different than the "real" timestamp. I  
asked about this on #bzr, and was told that date: revspecs have never  
been perfect in bzr. I didn't look into it any further.

- Ben

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3914 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20090116/de54d6b1/attachment-0001.bin