Just for clarification, the unicode offer is referring to the "where" for the time zone? Hosting only, not the "Who" i.e person/group maintaining the code and doing bug fixes. the last few threads are blurring the lines IMHO. - armin Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
-On [20090831 17:14], Mark Peek (mark@peek.org) wrote:
When ado sent out the first email on this thread, my first thought was that the Unicode Consortium would be a great place to maintain the timezone data. Throughout the resulting discussion I am still a "+1" for it to be maintained there. I believe Mark Davis has commented on different levels of release flexibility within the Unicode Consortium and I think the dialog has indicated that a fast and flexible release time line is what the users of tzdata are wanting. I am sure the Unicode Consortium would want to ensure the continued success, continuity and single source of tzdata if it was agreed for them to take this on.
Still a +1 for Unicode Consortium.
I can only add my +1 for hosting under the Unicode umbrella.
As a individual participant and contributor in both Unicode and CLDR discussions and matters I can attest that these two projects behave very differently.
A project like the timezone database could easily continue as it is now, despite being hosted there. As long as the importance of a quick turn around time and release management is stressed, I foresee no problems.
If needed, I am willing to help out with this process as well as documenting it, whatever it may be. :)