[tz] Proposal to revert 2023b’s Lebanon data changes

[Deborah Goldsmith]

Getting the update out quickly seems more important to me than modeling the exact sequence of transitions. You can always go back in and add the historical information in a subsequent release.

Debbie

> On Mar 27, 2023, at 11:11 AM, Paul Eggert via tz <tz at iana.org> wrote:
> 
> We need a new release soon to address the time zone chaos in Lebanon. One option is to revert 2023b's data and go back to 2023a as I suggested earlier. Another is to record the chaos in more detail in the data. The attached proposed patch (which I installed into the developmental repository on GitHub) takes the former approach, as I expect the latter would cause more problems than it would cure. This follows a similar (although not identical) precedent in Rio de Janeiro in 1993.
> 
> In short, the patch would make 2023c identical to 2023a except for comments, which do not count as part of the data.
> 
> It is a confusing and controversial situation. Comments welcome. In the meantime I again suggest to downstream distributors to stick with 2023a and avoid 2023b.
> <0001-Revert-2023b-s-data-changes.patch>