The sound distributed version control system

#635 [bug] Pijul record --timestamp unable to parse its own timestamp format

Closed on February 23, 2023
spacefrogg on January 26, 2022

The timestamp format returned from pijul diff or pijul log seems not to be palatable to pijul record --timestamp, which I find odd.

coconut on February 28, 2022

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: [...].

chevyparakeet added a change on November 7, 2022
Use RFC2822 date formatting in `log`, `tag`, and `record --timestamp` by 7qFsmcJTAmyi5DxiNk265yTyKeTGNeoqjQfzksWAeGkH, created on November 6, 2022
BPCAJCLTVK2GVWYURWJTPQ6XA34JUJZNZHG6ONX4ARM3QPJJ6UPQC
main
chevyparakeet on November 7, 2022

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.

pmeunier on February 23, 2023

Thanks! I just applied this patch.

pmeunier closed this discussion on February 23, 2023