[tz] Proposed time zone package changes (Fiji, Bahia Brazil, West Bank(Hebron))

[Robert Elz]

    Date:        Fri, 7 Oct 2011 14:47:23 -0300
    From:        Guilherme Bernardes Rodrigues <oguilherme at gmail.com>
    Message-ID:  <CAAeks0GjPeCa0-RRPTWvZFz03-5fLf8Vo52enH7ivfXLdhAHrg at mail.gmail.com>

  |    About the change in Bahia, Brazil
[...]
  |   The change can still occur, but it is better to wait for a
  | confirmation of something oficial not news about a statement.

Definitely, consider that part of the update on hold for now - which
could also mean that the update could be deferred for a while, since
this was the driving force for the urgency - but (assuming I did not
mess up my understanding of the change) we currently have incorrect data
published for Asia/Hebron - the change (both actual, and in the database)
is past now, so no current timestamps are being affected, but we should
have the correct data out as soon as possible, so I still propose to
issue an update on Monday.

With that in mind, I'd still appreciate people verifying the proposed
changes as best you're able (I can test that the syntax in the tzdata
file is correct, and generates the transitions as I intended - but I
cannot verify (in most cases) that the change proposed actually matches
reality for the region.

Second, I'd also appreciate assistance with getting the correct
acknowledgments for the sources of the changes, and their paths
leading to incorporation in the tz data files - 24 hours ago I had
no plan to be doing this, and so was not really paying that much
attention to the various messages about actual, planned, and possible
updates - yesterday (my yesterday) I just scanned my copy of the list
messages and tried to dig out all of the current updates I could find,
but I was never sure I actually traced the original, or most authoritative,
messages, and so in the data file updates I included none of the
commentary that Arthur generally added providing source information.
No slites intended, just insufficient time to make sure I had the
correct data - so please don't be shy about telling me that it was you
who discovered the change, and/or telling me how you'd like to be
noted in the database comments.

Third, it has been requested that I start the process (that the draft RFC
anticipates) of providing some authentication for the distributed .tar.gz
file (eventually files once a code update is required) and as long as
that turns out to be no harder than I have been informed, I'm going to
try it...    I'll be using my own PGP key (that you can verify from the
normal PGP key servers), most likely using gpg & the RSA key to do the
signing (but if anyone says that pgp2 or pgp5 is superior, or that I should
use the DSA key, I'll listen).   Note that (certainly this first time) this
is an experiment only, and you should not reject the data file because
you cannot verify the signature (if that happens, it is far more likely
that I messed up somehow than that the data file has been compormised!)

Lastly, with regard to this last part of Guilherme's message ...

  | Sorry my poor english,

No, no apology accepted, firstly because it wasn't needed, there was nothing
poor at all about your English, and second, because even if there had been,
there is absolutely no need to apologise for it - can you imagine what a
message would be like if I attempted to make it in Portuguese?

We (all) appreciate the efforts that everyone makes to communicate with us,
and do do that (mostly) in English, and we need all of that input.
It is the data we need mostly, please, no-one defer or avoid sending
messages to the list because you aren't sure of your English ability.
If needed, send in your own language, someone else will probably be able
to translate, and in any case, much of the content of substance will
usually be possible to extract (especially if you write dates using numbers...)
Or, attempt English, no-one will complain about, or even comment on, its
quality - that's not why we are here.

kre