Stephen Colebourne <scolebourne@joda.org> writes:
If you had made no changes since May, apart from to the C code and to current local time, then I, and many others, would be entirely happy.
I've been sitting on this comment for quite some time, but, seriously, haven't you noticed that it's trivial for you or anyone else to produce a tz distribution that satisfies these requirements? If that's what you want, well, you have all of the tools required to do this right now, and could have been doing this since May with far less investment of effort than you're currently putting into long messages to this mailing list. I guess I don't understand why you seem so deeply invested in convincing Paul that you're right and he's wrong when it's fairly trivially possible for you to generate exactly the data that you want according to the criteria that you want followed without insisting that other people do the work for you. If you want to freeze all historical data in stone at the state they were in as of May of this year and only adopt forward-looking changes, then by all means do so! Set up a web site, set up a Git repository, cherry-pick the changes you want, and enjoy the perfect control you then have over your data source. I have been following this mailing list for many, many years, and when I first started following it I read all messages to this list going back to the foundation of the list. With that information in mind, I'm quite comfortable in saying that the maintenance policy that you're asking for is not the maintenance policy that ado used, and is not the maintenance policy that has ever been used for this project. I don't understand why you're so insistent on pushing a different maintenance policy on the project against multiple objections instead of just filtering the project changes down to the ones you approve of and publishing your own work. -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>