On 29/10/15 01:02, Paul Ganssle wrote:
Is there anything in the proposed versioning schemes that is actually incompatible with your aims? If not, I'm not sure that scope has much to do with it anyway, since this is just an example of a use-case where people WILL want to know the tzdata version.
As much potential problem as there is with potentially misleading versioning in the zoneinfo data, I suspect there's an even higher possibility of confusion when there's NO standard way of getting version information, and every consumer of zic outputs is just rolling their own metadata storage on top of it.
Is the human-incremented nature of the versioning still the main stumbling block to the addition of versioning to the files?
That about sums it up? Up until now one could not even guarantee that if a distribution actually provided a version number that the content would match the same data from another distribution. A lot of genealogical data was ditched and re-built simply because there was no way of knowing just what had been used to produce normalized data. The problem on tzdist was getting an agreement that one NEEDS a reliable version number in order to identify just what version of data has been used to create a particular archive ... and this results in being able to update archives reliably moving forwards. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk