[tz] Bugs in Russia - Seven month past since 2011-09-17 - still not fixed

[Tobias Conradi]

On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Alan Barrett <apb at cequrux.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 02 May 2012, Tobias Conradi wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2011-September/008809.html
>>>>>> http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2011-October/008937.html
>>>
>>>
>>> Please could you explain the problems
>>
>> The problem is that the tz zones mentioned are wrong according to the
>> definition in the Theory file, if the sources provided are correct.
>>>
>>> and the suggested fixes?
>>
>> They are here
>> http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2011-September/008809.html
>> search for "Suggested"
>
>
> Sorry, it's still incomprehensible to me.  (I am skipping over the Russian
> text, and reading only the English parts.)
That's fine, English is sufficient.

> I see things like "Suggested new zone: Asia/Barnaul, split from Asia/Omsk"
> but I see no explanation of how the rules in the new Asia/Barnaul zone would
> differ from the rules in Asia/Omsk, or why.
Moves to Omsk Time

1995-05-28 Altai Krai, Altai Oblast
(Алтайский край и Республика Алтай 28 мая 1995 в 4:00)
Suggested new zone:
Asia/Barnaul, split from Asia/Omsk

Altai Krai and Altai Oblast moved (changed) to Omsk Time on 1995-05-28.

>A little research tells me that
> Barnaul is the administrative centre of Altai Krai, which is a region of
> Russia, but that too was not explained in the message.
Two country subdivisions named Altai are mentioned in
"tzdata2012c\europe". Theory file says the biggest population center
is used in the tz zone name, that is why it says "Barnaul".

So I think the fix was complete.

> Perhaps if I could read Russian, "the changes as written down in the Russian
> Wikipedia" would mean something to me.  Could you translate?
I did, start from line "Moves to Omsk Time"

>> - "changes" means "changes in offset from Moscow Time"
>> - "zones" means "zones with same offset from Moscow Time"
>
>
> I also did not understand your usage of "contiguous zones", because it was
> not clear that you were using "zone" in an unfamiliar way.
>
>
>>> or suggested fixes.
>>
>> What is not clear about the fixes suggested in link #1?
>
>
> The whole message was unclear.  Perhaps if you translated the Russian parts,
> and wrote the English parts in full sentences, it would make more sense.
For full sentences : Agreed.

>  Also, with my new understanding of what you meant by "contiguous zones", I
> may now be able to figure out the original messages, but I am not motivated
> to do so.
Thanks. I stop helping you with the zones now.

>
>> But anyway, as long as as one of the main maintainers makes up new rules
>> on the fly ("The first order of business is to ensure that current (2012)
>> time stamps are handled correctly throughout Russia.")  every contributor
>> may learn that suggested fixes are sometimes not integrated even if fully
>> explained, for reasons that are not specified in the Theory file.
>
>
> Regarding the first half of your sentence, I see no problem with one of the
> main maintainers deciding that it's more important to fix rules that affect
> current timestamps than it is to fix rules that affect timestamps in the
> past.
Can you tell me where this is specified in the Theory file as an
excuse not to fix the Siberian errors?


-- 
Tobias Conradi
Rheinsberger Str. 18
10115 Berlin
Germany

http://tobiasconradi.com