On Mon, 17 May 2004, ow wrote:
> [timestamps like 0002-10-30 are incorrectly seen as 2030-02-10].
Yes, that's a bug alright. I've fixed this in both the stable and
development cvs trees. While looking at this I noticed that the timestamp
code has no provisions for BC dates, so if you're working with years in
that area, that's something to be aware of. Fixing that has gone on the
todo list, but I wanted to get this fix out to you now.
Kris Jurka