Bugs in Russia - Seven month past since 2011-09-17 - still not fixed

Can these bugs please be fixed http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2011-September/008809.html http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2011-October/008937.html ? -- Tobias Conradi Rheinsberger Str. 18 10115 Berlin Germany http://tobiasconradi.com/tobias_conradi

The first order of business is to ensure that current (2012) time stamps are handled correctly throughout Russia. A couple of prerequisites: 1. Some areas of Russia reportedly changed time zones in 2011. Does anyone know the exact instants at which these changes were made (both date and time for each affected region, since the instant at which the change was made may vary from region to region)? 2. In 2010 much of Russia did not turn its clocks back in the fall. Does anyone know whether folks in Russia now think of themselves as being on "permanent daylight saving time" or think of themselves as having new, different standard times? As always, references to government documents are best. Thanks for any light folks can shed. --ado On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 4:10 PM, Tobias Conradi <tobias.conradi@gmail.com>wrote:
Can these bugs please be fixed http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2011-September/008809.html http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2011-October/008937.html ?
-- Tobias Conradi Rheinsberger Str. 18 10115 Berlin Germany

Please start a new thread for issues not related with the bugs in question.
The first order of business ... Will the TZ Coordinators also do what the second and third order of business demands?
What are the reasons for not fixing the Siberia bugs?
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2011-September/008809.html http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2011-October/008937.html
Tobias Conradi -- Tobias Conradi Rheinsberger Str. 18 10115 Berlin Germany http://tobiasconradi.com/tobias_conradi

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012, Tobias Conradi wrote:
Will the TZ Coordinators also do what the second and third order of business demands?
What are the reasons for not fixing the Siberia bugs?
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2011-September/008809.html http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2011-October/008937.html
Please could you explain the problems and the suggested fixes? The links to archived messages are not helpful, because the archived messages do not contain clear descriptions of the problems or suggested fixes. --apb (Alan Barrett)

On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Alan Barrett <apb@cequrux.com> wrote:
On Sun, 29 Apr 2012, Tobias Conradi wrote:
Will the TZ Coordinators also do what the second and third order of business demands?
What are the reasons for not fixing the Siberia bugs?
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2011-September/008809.html http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2011-October/008937.html
Please could you explain the problems The problem is that the tz zones mentioned are wrong according to the definition in the Theory file, if the sources provided are correct.
and the suggested fixes? They are here http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2011-September/008809.html search for "Suggested"
The links to archived messages are not helpful, To me they are.
because the archived messages do not contain clear descriptions of the problems
"That is the changes as written down in the Russian Wikipedia lead to contiguous zones at any time, while the current rules in tzdata do not." - "changes" means "changes in offset from Moscow Time" - "zones" means "zones with same offset from Moscow Time"
or suggested fixes. What is not clear about the fixes suggested in link #1?
But anyway, as long as as one of the main maintainers makes up new rules on the fly ("The first order of business is to ensure that current (2012) time stamps are handled correctly throughout Russia.") every contributor may learn that suggested fixes are sometimes not integrated even if fully explained, for reasons that are not specified in the Theory file. -- Tobias Conradi Rheinsberger Str. 18 10115 Berlin Germany http://tobiasconradi.com

On Wed, 02 May 2012, Tobias Conradi wrote:
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2011-September/008809.html http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2011-October/008937.html
Please could you explain the problems The problem is that the tz zones mentioned are wrong according to the definition in the Theory file, if the sources provided are correct. and the suggested fixes? They are here http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2011-September/008809.html search for "Suggested"
Sorry, it's still incomprehensible to me. (I am skipping over the Russian text, and reading only the English parts.) I see things like "Suggested new zone: Asia/Barnaul, split from Asia/Omsk" but I see no explanation of how the rules in the new Asia/Barnaul zone would differ from the rules in Asia/Omsk, or why. A little research tells me that Barnaul is the administrative centre of Altai Krai, which is a region of Russia, but that too was not explained in the message.
The links to archived messages are not helpful, To me they are.
because the archived messages do not contain clear descriptions of the problems
"That is the changes as written down in the Russian Wikipedia lead to contiguous zones at any time, while the current rules in tzdata do not."
Perhaps if I could read Russian, "the changes as written down in the Russian Wikipedia" would mean something to me. Could you translate?
- "changes" means "changes in offset from Moscow Time" - "zones" means "zones with same offset from Moscow Time"
I also did not understand your usage of "contiguous zones", because it was not clear that you were using "zone" in an unfamiliar way.
or suggested fixes. What is not clear about the fixes suggested in link #1?
The whole message was unclear. Perhaps if you translated the Russian parts, and wrote the English parts in full sentences, it would make more sense. Also, with my new understanding of what you meant by "contiguous zones", I may now be able to figure out the original messages, but I am not motivated to do so.
But anyway, as long as as one of the main maintainers makes up new rules on the fly ("The first order of business is to ensure that current (2012) time stamps are handled correctly throughout Russia.") every contributor may learn that suggested fixes are sometimes not integrated even if fully explained, for reasons that are not specified in the Theory file.
Regarding the first half of your sentence, I see no problem with one of the main maintainers deciding that it's more important to fix rules that affect current timestamps than it is to fix rules that affect timestamps in the past. I won't respond to the implied accusations in the second half of your sentence. --apb (Alan Barrett)

Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 08:36:53 +0200 From: Alan Barrett <apb@cequrux.com> Message-ID: <20120502063653.GC8853@apb-laptoy.apb.alt.za> | Sorry, it's still incomprehensible to me. (I am skipping over the | Russian text, and reading only the English parts.) I'm with Alan, I've read the messages a few times now, and I don't have the vaguest idea what was requested to be changed, or why. And ... tobias.conradi@gmail.com said: | But anyway, as long as as one of the main maintainers makes up new rules on | the fly ("The first order of business is to ensure that current (2012) time | stamps are handled correctly throughout Russia.") that isn't "making up new rules on the fly" - our primary objective is to have people's clocks display the correct local time for *now*, and after that to be able to correctly translate historical timestamps, and then, as best we are able, guess at reasonable likely conversions of future timestamps. As long as everyone has some TZ value they can set to achieve those objectives, as much as it is possible, then we're mostly done - everything beyond that is just a frill. Note in particular that this project does not provide any kind of mapping service - determining which zone someone should use to get the correct timestamp translations is not our problem - we don't set out to make that needlessly difficult, but nor is that a problem we are attempting to solve. kre

I'm with Alan, I've read the messages a few times now, and I don't have the vaguest idea what was requested to be changed, Not sure, what is not to be understand with:
"Suggested new zone: Asia/Barnaul, split from Asia/Omsk"
or why. "Moves to Omsk Time" .. 1995-05-28 Altai Krai, Altai Oblast
FIX: oblast should be Republic.
And ...
tobias.conradi@gmail.com said: | But anyway, as long as as one of the main maintainers makes up new rules on | the fly ("The first order of business is to ensure that current (2012) time | stamps are handled correctly throughout Russia.")
that isn't "making up new rules on the fly" If not on the fly, it should be specified in the Theory file, so that contributors are warned that their fixes may not be added for 7+ months if they don't affect current time stamps.
Note in particular that this project does not provide any kind of mapping service I think you are misinformed here. E.g. for "Zone Asia/Omsk" it says in tzdata2012c\europe #... [This region consists of] # Respublika Altaj, Altajskij kraj, Omskaya oblast'.
Which is a mapping, albeit one with a bug, that's what my suggested fix is for.
- determining which zone someone should use to get the correct timestamp translations is not our problem I think you are misinformed again.
-- Tobias Conradi Rheinsberger Str. 18 10115 Berlin Germany http://tobiasconradi.com

Tobias Conradi said:
I'm with Alan, I've read the messages a few times now, and I don't have the vaguest idea what was requested to be changed, Not sure, what is not to be understand with:
"Suggested new zone: Asia/Barnaul, split from Asia/Omsk"
or why. "Moves to Omsk Time" .. 1995-05-28 Altai Krai, Altai Oblast
If the zone is split from the Omsk zone, then on 1995-05-28 it was already on Omsk time. So how would the two zones differ?
FIX: oblast should be Republic.
If there's a new zone, then that fix can be made. Or the change can be made in the existing zone.
If not on the fly, it should be specified in the Theory file, so that contributors are warned that their fixes may not be added for 7+ months if they don't affect current time stamps.
I think you mean "... their fixes may not be added for 7+ months if nobody else can understand what they're asking to be changed".
- determining which zone someone should use to get the correct timestamp translations is not our problem I think you are misinformed again.
No, I think you are. -- Clive D.W. Feather | If you lie to the compiler, Email: clive@davros.org | it will get its revenge. Web: http://www.davros.org | - Henry Spencer Mobile: +44 7973 377646

On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 5:15 PM, Clive D.W. Feather <clive@davros.org> wrote:
Tobias Conradi said:
I'm with Alan, I've read the messages a few times now, and I don't have the vaguest idea what was requested to be changed, Not sure, what is not to be understand with:
"Suggested new zone: Asia/Barnaul, split from Asia/Omsk"
or why. "Moves to Omsk Time" .. 1995-05-28 Altai Krai, Altai Oblast
If the zone is split from the Omsk zone, then on 1995-05-28 it was already on Omsk time. Depends on definition of "split". I applied the term purely to the current geographical mapping. The Altais are wrongly attached to Asia/Omsk.
FIX: oblast should be Republic.
If there's a new zone, then that fix can be made. Or the change can be made in the existing zone. This fix only is related to my wrong proposal.
If not on the fly, it should be specified in the Theory file, so that contributors are warned that their fixes may not be added for 7+ months if they don't affect current time stamps.
I think you mean "... their fixes may not be added for 7+ months if nobody else can understand what they're asking to be changed". No, I don't mean that.
- determining which zone someone should use to get the correct timestamp translations is not our problem I think you are misinformed again.
No, I think you are. A tz database is of low value if users cannot map geographical areas to the zones in the database.
-- Tobias Conradi Rheinsberger Str. 18 10115 Berlin Germany http://tobiasconradi.com/

I'm with Alan, I've read the messages a few times now, and I don't have the vaguest idea what was requested to be changed,
Not sure, what is not to be understand with:
"Suggested new zone: Asia/Barnaul, split from Asia/Omsk"
or why.
"Moves to Omsk Time" .. 1995-05-28 Altai Krai, Altai Oblast
This is an incomplete specification. You suggest that a new zone, Asia/Barnaul, should use the Omsk rules from 1995-05-28, but make no suggestion for which rules apply to Asia/Barnaul before that date. Malcolm This email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the addressee, do not disclose, copy, circulate or in any other way use or rely on the information contained in this email or any attachments. If received in error, notify the sender immediately and delete this email and any attachments from your system. Emails cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error free as the message and any attachments could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, delayed, incomplete or amended. Standard Chartered PLC and its subsidiaries do not accept liability for damage caused by this email or any attachments and may monitor email traffic. Standard Chartered PLC is incorporated in England with limited liability under company number 966425 and has its registered office at 1 Aldermanbury Square, London, EC2V 7SB. Standard Chartered Bank ("SCB") is incorporated in England with limited liability by Royal Charter 1853, under reference ZC18. The Principal Office of SCB is situated in England at 1 Aldermanbury Square, London EC2V 7SB. In the United Kingdom, SCB is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority under FSA register number 114276. If you are receiving this email from SCB outside the UK, please click http://www.standardchartered.com/global/email_disclaimer.html to refer to the information on other jurisdictions.

Not sure, what is not to be understand with:
"Suggested new zone: Asia/Barnaul, split from Asia/Omsk"
or why.
"Moves to Omsk Time" .. 1995-05-28 Altai Krai, Altai Oblast
This is an incomplete specification. You suggest that a new zone, Asia/Barnaul, should use the Omsk rules from 1995-05-28, but make no suggestion for which rules apply to Asia/Barnaul before that date.
Yes it is incomplete regarding the time before, and it didn't claim to be complete here. It was only there to fix the false information in the db that on the day before 1995-05-28 the Altais observed the time of Asia/Omsk. -- Tobias Conradi Rheinsberger Str. 18 10115 Berlin Germany http://tobiasconradi.com

Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 16:45:51 +0200 From: Tobias Conradi <tobias.conradi@gmail.com> Message-ID: <CAAGevbWSLP8j0VLs7k__3nETdgWRt=5z4qrE2A9asqBjN2JeEg@mail.gmail.com> | Not sure, what is not to be understand with: | | "Suggested new zone: | Asia/Barnaul, split from Asia/Omsk" | >or why. | "Moves to Omsk Time" What is Omsk time ?? Aside from its name, what is its offset from UTC, and how has that altered through history? (What dates and times, if any, did Omsk time alter its UTC offset?) kre

On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 11:09:14PM +0700, Robert Elz wrote: [...]
What is Omsk time ?? Aside from its name, what is its offset from UTC, and how has that altered through history? (What dates and times, if any, did Omsk time alter its UTC offset?)
The reporter has succeeded to confuse almost everybody. :) There is a good link on the subject of Omsk Time, with references: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omsk_Time -- ldv

On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 6:33 PM, Dmitry V. Levin <ldv@altlinux.org> wrote:
On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 11:09:14PM +0700, Robert Elz wrote: [...]
What is Omsk time ?? Aside from its name, what is its offset from UTC, and how has that altered through history? (What dates and times, if any, did Omsk time alter its UTC offset?)
The reporter has succeeded to confuse almost everybody. :) My definition of "everybody" does not allow you to deduct that from the information shared on the tzdb.
There is a good link on the subject of Omsk Time, with references: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omsk_Time With currently the last edit on 14 October, that is not so long after my report of the bug to the tz mailing list. So the tz editor in question did not get confused and was outside your "almost everybody".
And even worse, the bug was already made obvious in February 2011 in Wikipedia at what you claim to be a "good link" http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Omsk_Time&diff=415203440&oldid=415... And the WP editor in question got blocked as a sock puppet of ... User:Tobias_Conradi. Was it Tobias Conradi under another account? And it is so easy to find the "good link", but tz mailing list Tobias Conradi "succeeds in confusing almost everybody". Very powerful he seems to be to you. -- Tobias Conradi Rheinsberger Str. 18 10115 Berlin Germany http://tobiasconradi.com/

On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 06:13:55AM +0200, Tobias Conradi wrote:
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 6:33 PM, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 11:09:14PM +0700, Robert Elz wrote: [...]
What is Omsk time ?? Aside from its name, what is its offset from UTC, and how has that altered through history? (What dates and times, if any, did Omsk time alter its UTC offset?)
The reporter has succeeded to confuse almost everybody. :) My definition of "everybody" does not allow you
What a nonsense. -- ldv

| Not sure, what is not to be understand with: | | "Suggested new zone: | Asia/Barnaul, split from Asia/Omsk"
| >or why. | "Moves to Omsk Time"
What is Omsk time ?? The time observed in Omsk.
Aside from its name, what is its offset from UTC, See tzdb entry for Asia/Omsk.
and how has that altered through history? See tzdb entry for Asia/Omsk.
(What dates and times, if any, did Omsk time alter its UTC offset?) See tzdb entry for Asia/Omsk.
-- Tobias Conradi Rheinsberger Str. 18 10115 Berlin Germany http://tobiasconradi.com/

On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Alan Barrett <apb@cequrux.com> wrote:
On Wed, 02 May 2012, Tobias Conradi wrote:
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2011-September/008809.html http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2011-October/008937.html
Please could you explain the problems
The problem is that the tz zones mentioned are wrong according to the definition in the Theory file, if the sources provided are correct.
and the suggested fixes?
They are here http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2011-September/008809.html search for "Suggested"
Sorry, it's still incomprehensible to me. (I am skipping over the Russian text, and reading only the English parts.) That's fine, English is sufficient.
I see things like "Suggested new zone: Asia/Barnaul, split from Asia/Omsk" but I see no explanation of how the rules in the new Asia/Barnaul zone would differ from the rules in Asia/Omsk, or why. Moves to Omsk Time
1995-05-28 Altai Krai, Altai Oblast (Алтайский край и Республика Алтай 28 мая 1995 в 4:00) Suggested new zone: Asia/Barnaul, split from Asia/Omsk Altai Krai and Altai Oblast moved (changed) to Omsk Time on 1995-05-28.
A little research tells me that Barnaul is the administrative centre of Altai Krai, which is a region of Russia, but that too was not explained in the message. Two country subdivisions named Altai are mentioned in "tzdata2012c\europe". Theory file says the biggest population center is used in the tz zone name, that is why it says "Barnaul".
So I think the fix was complete.
Perhaps if I could read Russian, "the changes as written down in the Russian Wikipedia" would mean something to me. Could you translate? I did, start from line "Moves to Omsk Time"
- "changes" means "changes in offset from Moscow Time" - "zones" means "zones with same offset from Moscow Time"
I also did not understand your usage of "contiguous zones", because it was not clear that you were using "zone" in an unfamiliar way.
or suggested fixes.
What is not clear about the fixes suggested in link #1?
The whole message was unclear. Perhaps if you translated the Russian parts, and wrote the English parts in full sentences, it would make more sense. For full sentences : Agreed.
Also, with my new understanding of what you meant by "contiguous zones", I may now be able to figure out the original messages, but I am not motivated to do so. Thanks. I stop helping you with the zones now.
But anyway, as long as as one of the main maintainers makes up new rules on the fly ("The first order of business is to ensure that current (2012) time stamps are handled correctly throughout Russia.") every contributor may learn that suggested fixes are sometimes not integrated even if fully explained, for reasons that are not specified in the Theory file.
Regarding the first half of your sentence, I see no problem with one of the main maintainers deciding that it's more important to fix rules that affect current timestamps than it is to fix rules that affect timestamps in the past.
Can you tell me where this is specified in the Theory file as an excuse not to fix the Siberian errors? -- Tobias Conradi Rheinsberger Str. 18 10115 Berlin Germany http://tobiasconradi.com

On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 10:50:39AM -0400, Arthur David Olson wrote: [...]
2. In 2010 much of Russia did not turn its clocks back in the fall. Does
You mean in 2011 I suppose.
anyone know whether folks in Russia now think of themselves as being on "permanent daylight saving time" or think of themselves as having new, different standard times?
Since 2011, most Russian territories have a standard time ahead of mean solar time, including time in some cites ahead it even by two hours. For example, Moscow at ~37°E is ~1:15 ahead of solar time, and St. Petersburg at ~30°E is ~2:00 ahead. How many folks in Russia understand that the current situation rather looks like permanent daylight saving time is hard to say.
As always, references to government documents are best.
http://www.rg.ru/2011/09/06/chas-zona-dok.html (in Russian). Automatic translation http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rg.ru%2... seems to be rough but correct. That is, according to the law, Europe/Moscow is UTC+04 with no daylight saving. -- ldv

On 02/05/12 12:46, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
Automatic translation http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rg.ru%2... seems to be rough but correct.
That is, according to the law, Europe/Moscow is UTC+04 with no daylight saving.
Please note that the ambiguous term "Eastern Standard Time" (in the translated text) is Google's interpretation of the Russian "moskovskoye wremya", "Moscow time". David
participants (8)
-
Alan Barrett
-
Arthur David Olson
-
Clive D.W. Feather
-
David Grellscheid
-
Dmitry V. Levin
-
Robert Elz
-
Tobias Conradi
-
Wallace, Malcolm