.issues/c568146d3275c22b/new/1208380912.M328161P23014Q15.metatron
author Dmitriy Morozov <morozov@cs.duke.edu>
Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:22:20 -0400
changeset 22 88f126b2dd08
permissions -rwxr-xr-x
Converted issues from mbox to maildir mailboxes

Return-Path: <mirko@friedenhagen.de>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.2 (2007-07-23) on one.cs.duke.edu
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	version=3.2.2
Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.177])
	by one.cs.duke.edu (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id m07KpqWA020073
	for <morozov@cs.duke.edu>; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 15:51:52 -0500 (EST)
Received: from borg.local (HSI-KBW-085-216-123-176.hsi.kabelbw.de [85.216.123.176])
	by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mrelayeu7) with ESMTP (Nemesis)
	id 0ML2xA-1JBywk2eIR-0000fy; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 21:51:46 +0100
Message-Id: <1ACD99E9-9100-4C7D-916C-F3516EC9CF66@friedenhagen.de>
From: Mirko Friedenhagen <mirko@friedenhagen.de>
To: Dmitriy Morozov <morozov@cs.duke.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20080106062303.GA12860@cs.duke.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v915)
Subject: Re: hg ishow fails in clone of Artemis-repo
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 21:51:45 +0100
References: <D08973FE-D4D3-471D-A0E3-4CE2C4C4677F@friedenhagen.de> <20080104233436.GA1930@cs.duke.edu> <312C0172-3EF2-488A-A993-CF56C183F9A0@friedenhagen.de> <20080105124708.GA7043@cs.duke.edu> <8B223BED-8A46-4129-A4F3-76B50A890874@friedenhagen.de> <20080106054557.GA12219@cs.duke.edu> <20080106054630.GB12219@cs.duke.edu> <20080106062303.GA12860@cs.duke.edu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.915)
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18QJcYZDo6Q37uJfFynUsBGK2GGByd94i/JhM6
 I9MfCwpXS9DUnY0O0ZIhHan+nj+Gx7xd+r8zc31Da+yFftsUtL
 FD+bmLhzp9S5QOyPPuamA==
Status: RO
Content-Length: 265
Lines: 12

Hello Dmitry,

I was digging a bit:
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2822.html
states a numeric timezone must be used (see "A.6.2. Obsolete dates",  
section 4.3. and 3.3.).

Though I do not understand, why the other dates are parsed without a  
problem.

Regards
Mirko