[tz] TZ Coordinator candidate

[( Marc A. Lehmann )]

On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 08:38:53AM +0000, Zefram <zefram at fysh.org> wrote:
> With ado's retirement now almost upon us, I'd like to volunteer for the
> role of TZ Coordinator.  Although I've only been directly involved, on
> the mailing list, for half a year, I've been peripherally involved for
> much longer.  I'm very comfortable working in this space, and I believe
> I have the right personal qualities for the job.

If this was a vote, I would vote against you.

The reason is that you are far from being calm or helpful - you often make
broad claims, but when asked to explain them, you never do. Later they
turn out to be evidence-less.

As a TZ maintainer, you should reason things out (at least once), and not
insist on you being right based on authority, but based on evidence.

>From previous threads on this list it also looks as if you often have a
non-technical agenda, which is probably bad for a technical project which
requires objective and impartial decisions ("calm").

As a TZ maintainer, you should not get influenced by your personal goals,
at least not too much.

> I have a calm temperament, which kre rightly identified (on 2009-09-04)
> as a vital quality for this role.

Just to clear any misunderstandings that your statement might (or might
not) cause, kre did _NOT_ identify your calm temperament as a vital
quantity.

> Particularly see the leap seconds mailing list, where in the past couple
> of years many discussions have regrettably become much more heated
> than befits the calibre of participant, and perl5-porters, where I've
> occasionally dealt with a prickly CPAN author.

So in the recent years when you joined discussions got more heated, and
you take part. That's not good advertising. Also, being member
of a perl mailinglist is hardly in any way relevant.

The job of a TZ maintainer is quite different from that of a perl module
author.

Also, while I don't know what prickly cpan author you dealt with, this
hardly belongs here, and the fact that you send thinly veiled insults
about other people (despite being anonymous) on unrelated lists is hardly
evidence for a "calm temperament".

A TZ maintainer should not bring his personal fights on other mailinglists
to his job as TZ maintainer.

> Although it's not strictly necessary in a TZ Coordinator, I'm technically
> well qualified to look after the timezone code.  C was my main programming
> language for about ten years, 1988 to 1998.

Ten years is hardly a long time - but I agree that's not vital, as others
on this list have, in the past, shown exceptionally competence in this
area and the willingness to help out if needed.

> has been Perl, but I still regularly work in C.  About half of the Perl
> modules that I've published are largely implemented in C, for one reason
> or another, and I'm a contributor to the Perl core, which is written
> in C.  The quality of my code can be discerned by perusal of my published
> Perl modules.

Again, perl module author is hardly relevant for the job at hand.

It would be much more interesting to hear about your qualities as a TZ
maintainer.

> As a bonus, I have some plans for how the database should develop from
> where it is now.

That sounds rather scary to me.

I am sure I am not the only one who'd rather not see any "developments",
but merely the enourmous stability that we have seen and appreciated in
the past.

> as TZ Coordinator.  Most obviously, I haven't been on the TZ mailing list
> very long.  I tend to pick things up quickly, but this is a defect in the
> experience I'd bring to the role.

Right.

To be honest, the thought of you becoming maintainer and changing things
a lot, as is clear form this and your previous mails, makes me outright
scared.

The greatest thing about the olson database and associated code is stability,
the strive for portability while keeping things simple.

The impression you give me is that the next thing you'll do is add
autoconf support, integrate it into your perl module etc. - I am
exaggerating, but change is so extraordinarily negative in this area that
proposing to "develop" into new directions instantly disqualifies somebody
from the role.

Just my ¢2.