[tz] Version in zoneinfo files?

Paul Ganssle pganssle at gmail.com
Thu Oct 29 01:02:22 UTC 2015

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?

On 10/28/2015 08:47 PM, Lester Caine wrote:
> On 29/10/15 00:40, John Hawkinson wrote:
>>> But my other problem is with the local tz identifiers which have
>>>> different values in backzone pre-1970. In particular the UK zones which
>> Again, it is extremely difficult to parse your speech here, but
>> we do not really address pre-1970 issues. I think it is out of the tz
>> project's scope.
> In which case TZ should not include any pre-1970 data? Instead of
> providing pre-1970 data which has been proven wrong ...

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/attachments/20151028/c41801fe/attachment.sig>

More information about the tz mailing list