Re: [RFC 2/5] Pretty Print: show tz when using DATE_LOCAL

Michael Witten <mfwitten@gmail.com> writes:

I am not opposed to have a new mode that shows timestamps in local timezone with zone information, but this change is a regression to people who have known and relied upon that asking for timestamps in their local timezone will give everything in the local timezone and result in a short output by the virtue of not needing to repeat the zone string, as they are the same (this is not strictly true near your dst boundary, and that is why I am open to the idea as a separate option).

This is a tangent but it is funny to see the unnecessary Date: in-body header for a series about date display. Please drop it.

Backdating the author timestamp will make it harder to find the related discussion from the list archive; the only plausible benefit I can see is that you may get "I thought of this much earlier than when I posted it to the public for the first time" pee-in-the-snow value out of doing so, but that is done at the cost to all others who need to inspect the history later. Please don't.

As a future reference, when you have a valid reason to override the header information your MUA would give your message with an in-body header, please leave a blank line after the in-body header to make the result easier to read, like this:

        Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 16:06:36 +0000

        Currently, when the date mode is DATE_LOCAL, the
        time zone is never pretty printed;...

Also paragraphs that wrap lines at too narrow a margin is just as hard to read as paragraphs wrapped at a margin that is too wide. You seem to have wrapped at around 50 columns?