From: J William Piggott <elseifthen@gmx.com>
To: Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com>
Cc: util-linux@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [v3 PATCH 00/11] Pull Request - changelog
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 21:00:23 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6635776f-9787-f05c-704f-e326808daa1d@gmx.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180108102159.dyelg7kqp5tx3c3i@ws.net.home>
On 01/08/2018 05:21 AM, Karel Zak wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 09:53:18AM -0500, J William Piggott wrote:
>
> I have no clue how many users care and read our ReleaseNotes, but
> important is that they have opportunity to do that and they have
> always time to adopt to changes. This is how I promised that this
> project will be maintained.
Your response here puzzled me, because I could not remember you ever
making a pre-announcement of this nature before. For example when
hwclock's default output format was changed in v2.28 it didn't even make
the release highlights, let alone require a pre-change announcement. I
did a quick grep and could not find a single instance of an advance
notification for this type of change.
> Thanks. I'll work on cal(1) in next days and use us much as possible
> from your patches.
I originally started a branch implemented for an advance notification; I
backported some of my later fixes from the v3 submission to it. The
resulting branch may be more to your liking:
git@github.com:jwpi/util-linux.git 171225
The current v3 submission's branch is:
git@github.com:jwpi/util-linux.git 171229
Both branches have an updated commit message for renaming --julian to
--ordinal, expanding on the rational for it:
cal(1) is unique in that it uses both Julian and Gregorian calendar
systems. This causes a name collision with the --julian ordinal day
option.
Other commonly distributed code for POSIX-like systems do not share this
problem because they all use the proleptic Gregorian calendar system
exclusively; so they can get away with calling ordinal days 'julian' and
using things like %j for formatting ordinal days.
For cal(1) this ambiguity is problematic for developers, users,
and for the implementation itself.
There are no alternate names for the Julian calendar (system);
alternates names for (ordinal) Julian calendar are: day-of-year,
and ordinal. Ordinal being the preferred name:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_day#Terminology
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordinal_date
To implement an exclusive Julian Calendar output for cal(1) it will need
to use the name Julian, because there are no alternatives. Even for a
mixed calendar output the dates earlier than the reform epoch need to be
labeled and referred to as 'Julian'.
Therefore, the current --julian option needs to be renamed to --ordinal.
While working on cal I discovered more things that are broken. I wanted
to include the fixes in this patch set, but I thought it would be too
much for this round. What I envision as the output to address these new
issues will also need to use the term Julian to represent the calendar
system.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-11 2:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-02 14:53 [v3 PATCH 00/11] Pull Request - changelog J William Piggott
2018-01-02 14:54 ` [v3 PATCH 01/11] cal: change default output format J William Piggott
2018-01-02 14:55 ` [v3 PATCH 02/11] cal: change reformation to reform J William Piggott
2018-01-02 14:56 ` [v3 PATCH 03/11] cal: update man page and usage() J William Piggott
2018-01-02 14:57 ` [v3 PATCH 04/11] cal: rename --julian to --ordinal J William Piggott
2018-01-02 14:58 ` [v3 PATCH 05/11] cal: add private --caesar option J William Piggott
2018-01-02 14:59 ` [v3 PATCH 06/11] cal: make -w accept its optional argument J William Piggott
2018-01-02 14:59 ` [v3 PATCH 07/11] cal: update mutually exclusive options J William Piggott
2018-01-02 15:00 ` [v3 PATCH 08/11] cal: add short versions of new options J William Piggott
2018-01-02 15:01 ` [v3 PATCH 09/11] cal: remove the non-functional options J William Piggott
2018-01-02 15:02 ` [v3 PATCH 10/11] cal: fix first week calculation J William Piggott
2018-01-02 15:02 ` [v3 PATCH 11/11] cal: fix week calculations for --1752-reform J William Piggott
2018-01-03 10:06 ` [v3 PATCH 00/11] Pull Request - changelog Karel Zak
2018-01-08 10:21 ` Karel Zak
2018-01-09 1:17 ` J William Piggott
2018-01-24 18:13 ` Ruediger Meier
2018-01-11 2:00 ` J William Piggott [this message]
2018-01-11 9:01 ` Karel Zak
2018-01-11 13:35 ` J William Piggott
2018-01-12 10:57 ` Karel Zak
2018-01-15 2:02 ` J William Piggott
2018-01-15 13:36 ` Karel Zak
2018-01-16 21:35 ` J William Piggott
2018-01-16 21:39 ` [v5 PATCH 1/3] cal: move REFORMATION_YEAR to control struct J William Piggott
2018-01-16 21:41 ` [v5 PATCH 2/3] cal: add option to set Gregorian reform date J William Piggott
2018-01-16 21:42 ` [v5 PATCH 3/3] cal: update man page J William Piggott
2018-01-17 12:08 ` [v3 PATCH 00/11] Pull Request - changelog Karel Zak
2018-01-18 16:32 ` J William Piggott
2018-01-22 11:46 ` Karel Zak
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=6635776f-9787-f05c-704f-e326808daa1d@gmx.com \
--to=elseifthen@gmx.com \
--cc=kzak@redhat.com \
--cc=util-linux@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).