[tz] Some thoughts about the way forward

Paul Eggert eggert at cs.ucla.edu
Fri Sep 24 20:27:10 UTC 2021

On 9/24/21 9:03 AM, TJ wrote:

> I'm having trouble seeing where tzdb is being unfair to anyone at all
> under this definition. Some volunteer added historical zones for X, Y,
> Z.

That volunteer was me.

> Other volunteers can add zones for places that they are interested
> in. Everyone has equal opportunity to do so.

We can't have a free-for-all in which anyone can add a Zone for (say) 
Kosciusko County, Indiana to the primary database on the grounds that it 
differed from Indianapolis back in 1906. Even covering Indiana alone 
would require hundreds of Zones, the data would be practically 
impossible to verify, and the overall utility to end users would be 
negative (due to the resulting complication and confusion).

> As far as I can see right now, this change seems more unfair to
> people who have done the work to investigate and provide the data for
> certain zones.

The equity issues are not about tzdb contributors. They're about whether 
tzdb is fair (and appears to be fair) to users.

And even if one is truly worried about contributors, I contributed the 
vast majority of Zones. Tim Parenti has also contributed recently. We 
don't at all mind having our contributions be in 'backzone' rather than 
in some other file. I expect future contributors will be similar.

> could someone point
> me to a the relevant policy change document / rationale?

The current guidelines are here:


More information about the tz mailing list