Stephen Colebourne <scolebourne@joda.org> wrote: |I oppose this direction for the tzdb on principle. What i thought about this project (and that was my impression from the datasets, the only thing i deal[t] with) that there is a strategy of «best effort». I.e., data is collected and integrated if it seems reasonable. It was clear to me that there is a fuzzy point in the past, for which data cannot be accurate. |TL;DR: The tzdb isn't broken. Don't fix it. Therefore i fail to understand the entire direction, and agree with this statement. It seems a lot of people only use the data, not the code. I don't know about an alternative dataset of equal quality that could be used by those people. Therefore, and to me, it seems to be better to leave the data alone and only adjust the tools. If adjusting the tools is accepted by the consumers of these tools, then if that requires additional data to work, then this new data should be placed into a new file. |I encourage others who simply want to see tzdb ID history preserved |without change (and a focus placed back on current Government changes) |to add a +1 to this email. +1 |Stephen --steffen