Hello Stuart,
On 08/09/21 6:49 am, Stuart Marks wrote:
On 9/7/21 8:27 AM, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
On 07/09/21 8:35 pm, Roger Riggs wrote:
Though java.util.Date is used in the current implementation, its use
is discouraged in new code
in favor of java.time.ZonedDateTime.
Consider if java.time.format.DateTimeFormatter.RFC_1123_DATE_TIME
can be used to parse and format the time.
Noted. I'll take a look at these and update the PR as necessary.
Unless there's an overriding reason, it might be nice to have the
output format match the format used in the Debian patch that adds
SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH:
https://salsa.debian.org/openjdk-team/openjdk/-/blob/master/debian/patches/reproducible-properties-timestamp.diff
So the current patch implementation uses the format "d MMM yyyy HH:mm:ss
'GMT'", with a Locale.ROOT (for locale neutral formatting). I chose this
format since that was the one that the (deprecated)
java.util.Date#toGMTString() was using.
Roger's suggestion is to use DateTimeFormatter#RFC_1123_DATE_TIME date
format which is "dow, d MMM yyyy HH:mm:ss GMT" (where dow == day of week)
IMO, either of these formats are "well known", since they are/were used
within the JDK, especially the DateTimeFormatter#RFC_1123_DATE_TIME
which Roger suggested, since that's even a public spec.
The one in the debian patch is "yyyy-MM-dd HH:mm:ss z" which although is
fine to use, it however feels a bit "less known".
I was leaning towards Roger's suggestion to use the RFC_1123_DATE_TIME
in my upcoming patch update. Is there a reason why the one in debian's
patch is preferable compared to a spec backed format?
-Jaikiran
