Re: CLDR locales support in glibc

[Chris Leonard <cjlhomeaddress at gmail dot com>]

On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 10:04 AM, Rostislav Devyatov <deviatov@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm glad there is an immediate solution,
> Thank you. Do I understand correctly that the source file of this
> en_NL glibc locale only exists in the mailing list, not even in the
> "developers version" of glibc (here, for example
> https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=tree )?
>
>> but I also think the broader discussion is important.
> If opinions of general users are useful for this discussion, here is
> my opinion. I think that such a locale (or locales, one for each
> country) is useful for the following reason.


IMHO, such opinions are welcome on the list.

The competing forces pulling in different directions sometimes are;

1) What do the applicable standards say.  We are necessarily
standards-driven, but standards (especially those referring to other
standards are sometime written with a certain vagueness to allow for
changes in the upstream dependencies.  As odd as it sounds to say a
standard is intentionally made vague.  The letter of the law may not
always be clear, but the spirit of the law usually shines through.

2) What is most desirable to various stakeholders.   This can pull in
multiple ways at the same time all on it's own due to differing POV.
Lots of en.* locales would be fine with users, not so fine with
maintainers, etc.

Arriving at what is "the right thing" to do is not always as easy as
one might think.

cjl