From: Junio C Hamano Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 01:44:37 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] --date=relative falls back to "short" format for commits older than a year Message-ID: <7v7i3ix6yi.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <20090222230620.GB19011@coredump.intra.peff.net> Jeff King writes: > On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 01:23:54PM -0800, eletuchy@gmail.com wrote: > >> From: Eugene Letuchy >> >> In the context of sizing the git blame time column, it doesn't make a >> lot of sense to see "12 months ago" next to an exact timestamp + >> timezone for something 13 months ago. This commit makes commits older >> than 12 months display the date only, not the time. > > I think this is an improvement, though I was thinking of taking it a > step further: > ... > + /* Otherwise, years. Centuries is probably overkill. */ > + snprintf(timebuf, sizeof(timebuf), "%lu years ago", (diff + 183) / 365); > + return timebuf; > } > > if (mode == DATE_LOCAL) > > > but maybe other people actually like seeing the absolute time. I've > always found it jarring when reading relative times (but part of that > _was_ because it was so long and exact). I agree this is an improvement. It irritated me, too. And I do not think this change falls into the category of bad backward incompatibility. I was hoping somebody would do a "N years M months", though.