The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: on versions, revisions, and release dates

On Sun, 17 Mar 1996, Bruce Perens wrote:

> [...]    each package should contain a "Release-Date: " field, which would
> be a GMT date and time. This should be the only key by which packages are
> compared to other versions of the same package. Obviously, this key can be
> sorted reliably.

There was some back&forth between Ian J. and I regarding the date field
in the changes file.  Ian requested a RFC-822 (I think) compliant date,
and dchanges currently uses DATE=`date -u "+%d %b %y %H:%M UT"`.  That
produces a date which looks like:  10 Mar 96 19:11 UT

The package Release-Date field would need to be in a debian-standard format,
but more sortable than this.  How about DATE=`date -u "+%Y%m%d%H%M%SUT"`,
producing e.g., 19960318043433UT; or DATE=`date -u "+%Y%j%H%M%SUT"`,
producing e.g., 1996078043510UT?