The second line from the bottom should indeed be... -7:00 Mexico M%sT 2010 Apr 4 2:00 ...and I plan to get it corrected in the next release. --ado -----Original Message----- From: yoshito_umaoka@us.ibm.com [mailto:yoshito_umaoka@us.ibm.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 12:08 To: tz@lecserver.nci.nih.gov Subject: Re: proposed time zone package changes (Bahia de Banderas; version naming) Arthur David Olson <olsona@elsie.nci.nih.gov> wrote on 05/01/2010 10:19:16 AM:
+ + Zone America/Bahia_Banderas -7:01:00 - LMT 1921 Dec 31 23:59:00 + -7:00 - MST 1927 Jun 10 23:00 + -6:00 - CST 1930 Nov 15 + -7:00 - MST 1931 May 1 23:00 + -6:00 - CST 1931 Oct + -7:00 - MST 1932 Apr 1 + -6:00 - CST 1942 Apr 24 + -7:00 - MST 1949 Jan 14 + -8:00 - PST 1970 + -7:00 Mexico M%sT 2010 Apr 4 + -6:00 Mexico C%sT +
I saw the new zone above in tzdata2010j. The last 2 rule lines produce two transitions around Apr 4, 2010.
+ -7:00 Mexico M%sT 2010 Apr 4 + -6:00 Mexico C%sT
I use zdump (a little bit modified just for formatting outputs) to detect transitions and below is the result. 2010-04-03 Sat 23:59:59-0700[DST=0] > 2010-04-04 Sun 01:00:00-0600[DST=0] 2010-04-04 Sun 01:59:59-0600[DST=0] > 2010-04-04 Sun 03:00:00-0500[DST=1] I guess the second line from the bottom would be - -7:00 Mexico M%sT 2010 Apr 4 2:00 I'm wondering if this is intended, or just a bug. -Yoshito