[tz] Moving more zones to 'backzone'

[Paul Eggert]

On 8/15/22 15:14, Robert Elz wrote:

> patch can handle all kinds of input.

Sure, and 'patch' often goofs up - which is partly my fault as I am one 
of the three maintainers for 'patch'.

Plus, 'patch' is just part of the job. Often the commit message is just 
as important as the actual change. 'git format-patch' and 'git am' 
handle this nicely; 'patch' does not.

I want to minimize work evaluating and installing patches to 
out-of-scope parts of tzdb. This is not an unreasonable request. If you 
don't want to use 'git' that's fine; somebody else can do that part of 
the work, if maintaining 'backzone' is important to enough people.


> in non-compiled data (data not subject
> to automated checking) I tend to make all kinds of typos, which would
> need correcting, and second, because the kind of comments I would supply
> are unlikely to be the kind you'd be willing to commit.

It's OK if typos are limited to 'backzone' as it has unimportant data. 
Plus, you can always fix any typos later, whenever you get around to it. 
As for comment format let's see what sorts of comments you write: if 
others who care about 'backzone' don't care about the comments then I'm 
not likely to care either.


>    | For example, despite recent events
>    | in Kosovo we haven't had to worry about creating a name like
>    | Europe/Pristina, and this is a win.
> 
> I don't recall seeing anyone request one

Here's one example:

https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2014-January/020589.html