[tz] Moving more zones to 'backzone'

Philip Paeps philip at trouble.is
Thu Jul 7 15:24:14 UTC 2022

On 2022-07-07 21:59:39 (+0800), Howard Hinnant via tz wrote:
> On Jul 7, 2022, at 9:44 AM, Paul Eggert via tz <tz at iana.org> wrote:
>> Release 2021b moved to 'backzone' nine zones whose timestamps since 
>> 1970 were duplicates of other zones, as part of a process that 
>> started in 2013 in the interests of removing prior inequities, one 
>> step at a time. If we were to continue this process in the same way, 
>> we could install the attached proposed patch which would move more 
>> zones, chosen via the same procedure used for 2021b.
>> It strikes me, though, now that Stephen Colebourne has established a 
>> mechanism that can let downstream users keep the duplicate-since-1970 
>> zones, that it may be a more effective use of our time to move the 
>> rest of the duplicate-si ce-1970 zones now, while no urgent changes 
>> are pending. This would move another twelve zones if I've counted 
>> correctly, and would let us more efficiently turn our attention to 
>> other issues.
>> Comments welcome.
>> <0001-Move-9-more-zones-to-backzone.patch>
> My immediate reaction is that this issue caused a fork, and your 
> response now appears to be:  Good, let’s widen the difference 
> between the forks.

That was my immediate reaction too.

My second reaction was: but is anyone using the fork?  Followed by, very 
shortly after: and will these proposed changes push more people to the 

> I do not believe two forks of this database is a good idea, and I do 
> not believe the benefit of equity outweighs the disadvantages of the 
> existence of a fork.

I agree wholeheartedly!


Philip Paeps
Senior Reality Engineer
Alternative Enterprises

More information about the tz mailing list