[tz] [PROPOSED PATCH 2/2] Use lz format for new tarball
eggert at cs.ucla.edu
Fri Sep 2 05:23:07 UTC 2016
Brian Inglis wrote:
> I suspect that right zoneinfo is not hugely important to the vast majority
> of tz users, but it is probably critical to those who do use it for their
> work, and updates will require work dealing with future times to be redone.
I doubt whether there are many practical end-user applications of this sort. The
usages I've seen are regression testing and so forth, which need to deal with
more-urgent tz updates anyway. Serious astronomical users must deal not only
with leap seconds but also with a lot of other things, and I expect that they
have longstanding procedures for this stuff in place and do not need or use tz's
Any end users who need a tz-based leap-second table accurate months into the
future have had to deal with this problem for many years, as we've been
reasonably lackadaisical about generating new releases if the only reason was a
leap-second that is months in the future.
If this were a significant issue, it would be straightforward for a downstream
distributor like Ubuntu or FreeBSD to use the latest leapseconds file from NIST
or from GitHub. I don't know of any distributor who's done so.
More information about the tz