123278 - CSV and RDF buglists should not use relative dates

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Bugzilla :: Query/Bug List, enhancement)

Description

[Nick Blievers]

Some PVs display a time instead of a date in the opened or changed fields.
This is especially problematic when trying to copy and paste into another 
application, eg excel.
For example, try this query (assuming you have opened and changed fields enabled):
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&bug_status=RESOLVED&bug_status=VERIFIED&bug_status=CLOSED&email1=&emailtype1=substring&emailassigned_to1=1&email2=&emailtype2=substring&emailreporter2=1&bugidtype=include&bug_id=113550%2C+121312%2C+122917&changedin=&votes=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=&short_desc=&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&long_desc=&long_desc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&status_whiteboard=&status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstr&keywords=&keywords_type=anywords&field0-0-0=noop&type0-0-0=noop&value0-0-0=&cmdtype=doit&namedcmd=All&newqueryname=&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time
The top of the list shows two dates, the middle one date and a day/time and 
the bottom one a day/time and a time.

Comment 1

[Dave Miller [:justdave]]

This is on purpose.  Times are shown relative to how long ago the time is.  If
it's within the last 24 hours it just shows a time.  Within the last 6 months
shows just the month/day.  More than 6 months ago shows an ISO date (no time).

buglist.cgi was intended to be read by humans, not machines.

The XML export (xml.cgi) always shows full dates, it's intended to be machine
readable, however, that just shows individual bugs.

I could swear we already had a bug about having a way to override this, but I
can't find it.  So I'm leaving this open and morphing it to be that.

Comment 2

[Dave Miller [:justdave]]

*** Bug 241936 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 3

[Dave Miller [:justdave]]

*** Bug 232444 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 4

[Dominique]

Please excuse my ignorance! Would it be possible to give me some sort of 
explanation as to how I would be able to view what was spoken about when you 
said, "The XML export (xml.cgi) always shows full dates, it's intended to be 
machine readable, however, that just shows individual bugs."
Thanks

Comment 5

[Dave Miller [:justdave]]

That comment is a bit dated now... the XML stuff is built into show_bug.cgi
instead of having its own CGI script.  Try this:

http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=123278&ctype=xml

Comment 6

[Dave Miller [:justdave]]

buglist.cgi also has RDF and CSV outputs...  both of which should, in theory,
have consistant date formats instead of the relative ones.  Fixing that is, I
think, what this bug is about.

Comment 7

[Bo Zhang]

This feature is actually useful and we want to see the uniformed dates for Open Date and Last Changed Date. So, is there anyway to let admin to choose what format they want to use?

Comment 8

[Simon Green]

Attachment: bug123278-v1.patch

CSV and XML already show the full date. This change is for the ATOM feed.

Comment 9

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

(In reply to Simon Green (personal account) from comment #8)
> Created attachment 8472938 [details] [diff] [review]
> bug123278-v1.patch
> 
> CSV and XML already show the full date. This change is for the ATOM feed.

Will this produce a date which matches the Atom date spec?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atom_%28standard%29#Date_formats

If not, we should probably do that, to avoid having to make two breaking changes.

Gerv

Comment 10

[Simon Green]

Comment on attachment 8472938 [details] [diff] [review]
bug123278-v1.patch

(In reply to Gervase Markham [:gerv] from comment #9)
> (In reply to Simon Green (personal account) from comment #8)
> > Created attachment 8472938 [details] [diff] [review]
> > bug123278-v1.patch
> > 
> > CSV and XML already show the full date. This change is for the ATOM feed.
> 
> Will this produce a date which matches the Atom date spec?
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atom_%28standard%29#Date_formats

No. We produce "2012-10-24 07:34:45", but it seems it should be "2012-10-24T07:34:45Z"

> If not, we should probably do that, to avoid having to make two breaking
> changes.

We probably should :)

Comment 11

[Simon Green]

Attachment: v2 patch

Comment 12

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

Comment on attachment 8585241 [details] [diff] [review]
v2 patch

Review of attachment 8585241 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

r=gerv.

Gerv

Comment 13

[Simon Green]

To ssh://[e-mail]/bugzilla/bugzilla.git
   52ff6aa..82ea617  master -> master