Closed markdrzy closed 11 years ago
@mark-cr The current implementation of _build_relative_date
returns a timestamp that conforms to the Twitter Display Requirements ("Tweet Timestamp" under "Timelines"). I'd like to keep it that way. If you're interested in using a different human-readable format, can we put it in a different tag?
Also, it seems like pretty much everybody runs into the {relative_date}
issue where it pulls from the outer {exp:channel:entries}
loop, rather than the {exp:twitter:*}
loop. Maybe we need to rename that guy to prevent collisions and confusion.
@mark-cr FYI: I opened a new issue (#28) for renaming the existing {relative_date}
tag to something that doesn't collide and confuse.
Are you comfortable with {twitter_relative_date}
and {better_relative_date}
?
Yes and yes.
@bryanburgers - When you get a moment, please review these changes. I think I'm done now.
Looks good. Thanks, Mark.
Ugh. Bryan, wait on this pull request. I need to do some further testing.