On 11/24/2016 02:29 AM, Claude Brisson wrote: >> 6. I consider 435 to 441 being inconsisting to their counterpart 420 >> to 423. >> > > Oh, you're speaking about line numbers in ConversionUtils.java... why is > it inconsistent? When we're speaking about date only, there is no > timezone or separator involved, so it's the same format. >
Not necessarily, depends on what you mean by "date only". If I'm talking with someone on the other side of the dateline, and ask him what _date_ is now, he'll answer something different than what I know is the date. With the current code, the same date could be printed inconsistently as: 2001-02-03 2001-02-02T23:05:06-05:00 So, if by date we mean "date in Greenwich", then yes, the two formats are the same, but if we mean "local date", then it depends on where "local" is. If we want dates to be timezone agnostic, then we must explicitly set the timezone offset to 0. -- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@velocity.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@velocity.apache.org
