That looks for a path not a timestamp though, is this assumption incorrect? That is what git
does, and this is the error message I get: Error: Path not in repository: [...]
.
BPCAJCLTVK2GVWYURWJTPQ6XA34JUJZNZHG6ONX4ARM3QPJJ6UPQC
The above change addresses this issue (which I confirm being a frustrating dead-end), by using RFC2822 date formatting consistently.
In the process of recording the above change, I noticed at least one place that does not use RFC2822: the “text change” format as displayed in the user’s editor when running pijul record
. In this context, pijul uses a timestamp format like 2022-11-07T01:02:13Z
, as a result of serde TOML serialization. This later format also drops the timestamp specified by the user (showing all moments in UTC), which is not a huge problem, but differs from what those used to git
might expect. I don’t think this is a deficiency with the change I’ve uploaded as much as it is a related issue that could use some design work.
Thanks! I just applied this patch.
The timestamp format returned from
pijul diff
orpijul log
seems not to be palatable topijul record --timestamp
, which I find odd.