No, the real problem with the leap second is that it isn't predictable. Sometimes the observations make you require one, sometimes not, and there isn't a reliable way to predict this.

Maybe a slightly longer second would lower the number of leap seconds needed but it would not eliminate it. Then what would be the point of going through such pain if the problem isn't fixed?

On 08/08/2014 5:34 PM, Lester Caine wrote:

No, it's the length of the earth day that is changing over time as
earth's rotation slows due to natural forces.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/why-in-the-jurassic-era-an-earth-day-may-have-been-only-23-hours-long/2013/09/23/a75c548a-f2dc-11e2-ae43-b31dc363c3bf_story.html

Long term yes. Shorter term, say next 100 years, a small increase in
period of a second would be a suitable alternative to the 'problem' of
leap seconds ...

--

Patrice Scattolin | Principal Member Technical Staff | 514.905.8744
Oracle WebCenter Mobile applications
600 Blvd de Maisonneuve West
Suite 1900
Montreal, Quebec