On Jan 26, 2010, at 03:48, Felix Gilcher wrote:
> On Jan 26, 2010, at 2:26 AM, Tim Landscheidt wrote:
>
>> [snip] Is there a way to express the '-r {DATE}' syntax
>> with the "@" suffix? "@{2009-01-01}" seems to be ignored:
>
> [snip] A peg revision must be a revision number and cannot be a date [snip]
Agreed, but why is it that way? The desire to use a date seems just as valid in
peg revision context as it is in operative revision context, so why does the
operative revision syntax support it but the peg revision syntax doesn't?
