[tz] Some thoughts about the way forward

Stephen Colebourne scolebourne at joda.org
Fri Sep 24 09:15:39 UTC 2021

On Fri, 24 Sept 2021 at 09:58, Paul Eggert <eggert at cs.ucla.edu> wrote:
> It's clearly not equitable. We should not make special exceptions for
> Norway and Sweden while having China, southeast Asia, Africa, etc.
> follow the same rules as everyone else. There is no timekeeping
> justification for this; it's purely a political decision and it's a
> terrible look for us.

I'm not disagreeing with the notion that Norway and Sweden should
follow the same rules as everyone else. I am saying that current rules
result in what I consider to be an inequitable outcome where Berlin is
favoured over Oslo. I understand that you don't see that as
inequitable, but please try to understand that I do.

(The are also separate, but important downstream issues of stability
and breakages that need handling in a more considered manner)

> I've just sent a suggestion that would back off many of the changes
> you're objecting to. I view this as being a big concession on my part,
> because I'll now have to defend making a gradual fix to the equity
> problem. Would that suggestion be acceptable to you? Here it is again,
> if you haven't seen it in the recent blizzard of emails:
> > OK, how about if I scale back the current round of link-merging, so that it's on the scale of what we've done in previous releases? I would not at all be happy with such an approach since it would delay the release of an equitable solution, but if this approach will help reach consensus I can prepare a patch along those lines. The idea would be to finish the job in the next few releases.
> I really am trying to find a compromise here (even if it's a compromise
> that nobody likes :-). However, a compromise works only if the other
> side accepts it.

I have a good final position state for tzdb in my head, but I don't
want to write it to the list until everything is calmer. (My proposal
meets both your and my equity viewpoints).

My request is that 2021b contains no link merging so we can discuss
things calmly over the next couple of weeks. You won't need to defend
a gradual link-merge if we agree in advance on a long-term solution,
which I hope you see as a benefit.

(This also avoids the risks associated with an immediate fork, whether
internal eg 2021a1 or external)


More information about the tz mailing list