This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Weekday/Workday for EU locales in glibc
- From: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- To: Michael Matz <matz at suse dot de>
- Cc: libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com, "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at systemhalted dot org>, Keld dot Simonsen at dkuug dot dk, pablo at mandrakesoft dot com, roktas at omu dot edu dot tr, mckinstry at computer dot org, "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv at altlinux dot org>, Allan McRae <allan at archlinux dot org>, everson at irlearn dot ucd dot ie, metra at mii dot lu dot lv, coolbox at seka dot ktu dot lt, torita at jp dot ibm dot com, jordi at gnu dot org, gpul at ceu dot fi dot udc dot es, debian-glibc at lists dot debian dot org, aurel32 at debian dot org, Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo dot org>, raj dot khem at gmail dot com, Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>, Adam Conrad <adconrad at debian dot org>
- Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 23:36:49 -0600
- Subject: Re: Weekday/Workday for EU locales in glibc
- References: <4F887991.firstname.lastname@example.org> <CADZpyiwL2mPvGtrGu3Djt1wjYczeK2G7P5eXot5j8josh47WHw@mail.gmail.com> <4FBD24FD.email@example.com> <Pine.LNX.firstname.lastname@example.org> <4FBE7331.email@example.com> <Pine.LNX.firstname.lastname@example.org>
On 05/24/2012 04:53 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
I certainly understand your arguments and I certainly found the
situation, umm, inconsistent. A bit of web searching will show the lack
of locale fixes in glibc as being a source of significant frustration.
I understand. There are even fewer useful documents about weekday
conventions in legislations than there are about time changes. But OTOH
the same argument can be used against the initial and still current state:
"who documented and where are the so produced documents that defined the
current state to be correct?". Just because Uli required elaborate proofs
for _changes_ of the current status doesn't in any case imply the even
remote correctness of that state. In fact I think it was completely
arbitrary and in most cases just wrong (exactly because he didn't count
hear-say evidence like "nobody in our country considers Sunday first day";
meaning he took lack of official proof for incorrectness to be proof of
correctness of current state; which of course is absurd).
Regardless, I wasn't ready to try and fundamentally change how we do
things, but instead make a significant improvement in the state of the
locales. ISTM tackling these other issues is independent of moving
forward on cases where we can meet the burden of proof that has
traditionally been required.
Vast majority bounced. I think even the one gent who was responsible
for most of the locales bounced :(
Are we even discussing these topics on the right list? Half of the mails
in CC bounced,
*-locale(s?) weren't added,
-locales has been a complete black hole based on my experience. Adding
it would have been pointless IMHO.
and IMO, from reading the
I think we could certainly bring them into the larger discussion. Red
Hat has folks internally that deal with tz nonsense all the time as well
lists, the timezone list (olson) might have the diversest (if that's a
word) set of persons that could usefully contribute to the topic at hand;
even though it's not directly timezone related that list has the most
persons on it that are remotely interested (and able to produce links to
official documents) in time/date topics.
I'm certainly not suggesting we stop with fixing the EU locales, it's
step #1 and IMHO a step we ought to take now rather than wait on a new
set of policies & procedures and potential input from new contributors
such as olson, Petr M., etc.
That said, I of course am completely for changing the currently broken
locales. I just doubt that if one ventures into the other locales that
one would find those are correct regarding this topic. So fixing the
european locales only is useful, but I think ultimately hypocritical.