emv@math.lsa.umich.edu (Edward Vielmetti) (12/02/89)
In article <4673@celit.fps.com> billd@fps.com (Bill Davids_on) writes:
If we were to put this to a vote, I'd go for the form of:
Date: 30 Nov 89 19:20:21 -0700
It has the advantage of still being GMT and also giving the proper
conversion (you don't have to know the rules for every country in
the world or even state in the US). Someone said it's valid for RFC
822. Does getdate() handle this form? If not, we should fix it.
--Bill Davidson
Bill, I don't understand your comment of it "still being GMT". Do
you mean that your Date: is really
Date: 30 Nov 89 12:20:21 GMT
Date: 30 Nov 89 19:20:21 GMT
or Date: 1 Dec 89 02:20:21 GMT ?
I would add that it's too late to "fix" getdate() -- what it is is what
you've got, you have to live within its restrictions.
If the date format is going to change, then this function in gnus needs to
know about it. It is not as general a date parser as getdate(), not by
a long shot.
(defun gnus-comparable-date (date)
"Make comparable string by string-lessp from DATE."
;; Can understand the following styles:
;; (1) 14 Apr 89 03:20:12 GMT
;; (2) Fri, 17 Mar 89 4:01:33 GMT
--Ed
[follow-ups to gnu.emacs.gnus, I guess.]