[Scons-users] Thoughts on changing datestamp format in docs/code and supporting overriding build date with SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH

[Bill Deegan]

Please take a moment to review this PR.

"Allow to override build date with SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH"
https://github.com/SCons/scons/pull/3221

Besides allowing the shell environment variable SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH to
override the datestamp embedded in the distribution package and the
documents, it's also altering the datestamp format from:

From:
%Y/%m/%d %H:%M:%S

To:
%Y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S

Thoughts?

-Bill
SCons Project Co-Manager

[Russel Winder]

Post by Bill Deegan
Please take a moment to review this PR.
"Allow to override build date with SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH"
https://github.com/SCons/scons/pull/3221
Besides allowing the shell environment variable SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH to
override the datestamp embedded in the distribution package and the
%Y/%m/%d %H:%M:%S

Non-standard format.

Post by Bill Deegan
%Y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S

ISO 9601 alternative format, but not preferred.

Post by Bill Deegan
Thoughts?

Using ISO 8601 for dates is always a good idea.

Post by Bill Deegan
-Bill
SCons Project Co-Manager
_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users