Re: [tz] leap second 2012-06-30T23:59:60Z

Aloha,

is there going to be an official release for this issue ?

- Armin

On 01/06/2012 12:54 AM, Zefram wrote:
> Bulletin C 43 came out yesterday, scheduling a leap second for the end
> of June 2012.  Patch attached.
> 
> -zefram

Re: [tz] leap second 2012-06-30T23:59:60Z

akuster <akuster <at> mvista.com> writes:

> Aloha,
>
> is there going to be an official release for this issue ?

My question as well.  Or are we waiting for another zone change?  (In
that case, how about the recently-reported Armenian change, due March
25?)

Thank you,
PM

Re: [tz] leap second 2012-06-30T23:59:60Z

    Date:        Thu, 09 Feb 2012 11:53:43 +0100
    From:        Petr Machata <pmachata <at> redhat.com>
    Message-ID:  <m2pqdonuq0.fsf <at> redhat.com>

  | akuster <akuster <at> mvista.com> writes:
  | > is there going to be an official release for this issue ?
  | 
  | My question as well.  Or are we waiting for another zone change?

here is an update due, and the leap second update is in it already.
The Armenian change I'd like a little more confirmation of, if that's
possible, those changes seem to be frequently postulated, but less
often actually occur.   It is certainly a possibility, but something more
than an announcement of an intention would be nice to see,

Finally, apologies for not having made the promised update near the
beginning of the year, there is nothing major (urgent) in it yet,
but it should have appeared before now.  I am working on it, but a
little short of time at the minute (for the next week or so, after that
less of a problem for the next couple of months at least).

kre

Re: [tz] Australian time zone abbreviations

On 8 November 2011 15:55, Shaun Bouckaert <shaun.bouckaert <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Shaun Bouckaert <shaun.bouckaert <at> gmail.com>
> Date: 8 November 2011 15:31
> Subject: Re: [tz] Australian time zone abbreviations
> To: tz <at> iana.org
>
>
> On 8 November 2011 15:20, Shaun Bouckaert <shaun.bouckaert <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Thanks for the research Edwin.
>>
>> Considering that the Federal Government, ABC, SBS, Bureau of
>> Meteorology, and several large national newspapers (with a few
>> anomolies) all use the same notation, I would say that a fairly well
>> established standard exists. Perhaps it is the ambiguity caused by the
>> absence of the 'A' that lead to organisations coming up with things
>> like ADST. Given the existing use of the Axxx acronyms, the fact that
>> the Federal Government itself has defined the timezones as such and
>> the fact that there are bugs in software due to the ambiguity with the
>> American timezones, and finally, the fact that the only arguments
>> against it have been that the states haven't defined them in
>> legislation (was this proposed as if it somehow invalidated the
>> federal governments opinion?), it's hard to argue against it. As for
>> the confusion you've encountered Greg, perhaps if the Axxx labels were
>> used, less people would be confused and not be making up acronyms like
>> ADST.
>>
>> [snip]

[tz] Armenia adopted final reading to abolish DST

[tz] Armenia adopted final reading to abolish DST

Steffen Thorsen <thorsen <at> timeanddate.com> writes:

> 
> Many Armenian news sources report that Armenia will not observe DST this 
> year, but rather stay on UTC+4 through the year.
> 
> Example:
> "Armenia’s Economy Minister announced that this year the country will 
> not switch its time. "
> http://news.am/eng/news/90743.html
> 
> Our brief version: 
> http://www.timeanddate.com/news/time/armenia-ends-dst.html
> 
> Best regards,
> Steffen Thorsen - timeanddate.com
> 
>

 
According to News Armenia, on Feb 9, 2012, 
http://newsarmenia.ru/society/20120209/42609695.html

The Armenia National Assembly adopted final reading of Amendments to the 
Law "On procedure of calculation time on the territory of the Republic of 
Armenia" according to which Armenia abolishing Daylight Saving Time- 
WorldTimeZone.com. 

or

(brief)
http://www.worldtimezone.com/dst_news/dst_news_armenia03.html

Alexander Krivenyshev- WorldTimeZone.com
http://www.worldtimezone.com

Re: [tz] Civil suit; ftp shutdown; mailing list shutdown

John Hawkinson <jhawk <at> MIT.EDU> wrote on Fri,  7 Oct 2011
at 03:15:23 +0000 in <20111007031523.GB25751 <at> homeworld.netbsd.org>:

> The suit, if you wish to read it is, Astrolabe, Inc. v. Olson et al,
> docket number 1:11-cv-11725-GAO. The other plaintiff is Paul
> Eggert.
...
> http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.mad.139342/

The last activity the Court's docket reports is the summons
to Eggert and Olson was issued on September 30th, and the summons
has not been returned (i.e. they have not been served).

As I understand it, according to rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure, the Astrolabe had 120 days to serve Eggert and Olson
with the complaint. Assuming calendar days, which I think are correct
here, that 120 days would be up as of January 28, about 2 weeks ago.

I am rather uncertain what to think.

--jhawk <at> mit.edu
  John Hawkinson

09/30/2011
#3
Summons Issued as to Paul Eggert, Arthur David Olson. Counsel
receiving this notice electronically should download this summons,
complete one for each defendant and serve it in accordance with
Fed.R.Civ.P. 4 and LR 4.1. Summons will be mailed to plaintiff(s) not
receiving notice electronically for completion of service.
(York, Steve) (Entered: 09/30/2011)

Re: [tz] Civil suit; ftp shutdown; mailing list shutdown

On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 4:14 PM, John Hawkinson <jhawk <at> mit.edu> wrote:
> John Hawkinson <jhawk <at> MIT.EDU> wrote on Fri,  7 Oct 2011
> at 03:15:23 +0000 in <20111007031523.GB25751 <at> homeworld.netbsd.org>:
>
>> The suit, if you wish to read it is, Astrolabe, Inc. v. Olson et al,
>> docket number 1:11-cv-11725-GAO. The other plaintiff is Paul
>> Eggert.
> ...
>> http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.mad.139342/
>
> The last activity the Court's docket reports is the summons
> to Eggert and Olson was issued on September 30th, and the summons
> has not been returned (i.e. they have not been served).
>
> As I understand it, according to rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of
> Civil Procedure, the Astrolabe had 120 days to serve Eggert and Olson
> with the complaint. Assuming calendar days, which I think are correct
> here, that 120 days would be up as of January 28, about 2 weeks ago.
>
> I am rather uncertain what to think.

On January 12th, the EFF announced

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/01/just-facts-lawsuit-against-timezone-database-deserves-sanctions

"Today, we’re taking the battle to Astrolabe, and starting the process
for seeking sanctions under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure.  Rule 11 requires litigants to conduct a reasonable inquiry
into the facts and law before filing any paper with the court.
Obviously, that didn’t happen here.  Astrolabe now has 21 days to
withdraw its Complaint.  If it doesn’t do so, the Rule 11 “safe
harbor” expires and we’re free to ask the court for sanctions.  Once
the court reviews Astrolabe’s preposterous claims, and their dangerous
consequences, we expect it will agree with us and punish both the
company and its attorney so they never again try to abuse the legal
process."

Jan 12 + 21 days is Thursday, February 2nd. I am not a lawyer, but I
would expect the EFF to ask for sanctions forthwith.

I would also note that Astrolabe's lawyer has been sanctioned before.

Regards
Marshall

>
> --jhawk <at> mit.edu
>  John Hawkinson
>
> 09/30/2011
> #3
> Summons Issued as to Paul Eggert, Arthur David Olson. Counsel
> receiving this notice electronically should download this summons,
> complete one for each defendant and serve it in accordance with
> Fed.R.Civ.P. 4 and LR 4.1. Summons will be mailed to plaintiff(s) not
> receiving notice electronically for completion of service.
> (York, Steve) (Entered: 09/30/2011)

Re: [tz] leap second 2012-06-30T23:59:60Z

On 2012-02-09 22:08, Robert Elz wrote:

>    Date:        Thu, 09 Feb 2012 11:53:43 +0100
>    From:        Petr Machata <pmachata at redhat.com>
>    Message-ID:  <m2pqdonuq0.fsf at redhat.com>
> 
>  | akuster <akuster at mvista.com> writes:
>  | > is there going to be an official release for this issue ?
>  | 
>  | My question as well.  Or are we waiting for another zone change?
> 
> here is an update due, and the leap second update is in it already.
> The Armenian change I'd like a little more confirmation of, if that's
> possible, those changes seem to be frequently postulated, but less
> often actually occur.   It is certainly a possibility, but something more
> than an announcement of an intention would be nice to see,

Please also add the following. I don't have the book from Le Corre, but i can
read maps and recognize typos in names of French cities. I've also exchanged
Dole and Arbois.

Denis Excoffier.

diff -cNr 0/europe 1/europe
*** 0/europe    Fri Oct 28 11:58:45 2011
--- 1/europe    Sun Feb 12 14:53:54 2012
***************
*** 1150,1160 ****
  # The French rules for 1941-1944 were not used in Paris, but Shanks & Pottenger
  # write that they were used in Monaco and in many French locations.
  # Le Corre writes that the upper limit of the free zone was Arneguy, Orthez,
! # Mont-de-Marsan, Bazas, Langon, Lamotte-Montravel, Marouil, La
! # Rochefoucault, Champagne-Mouton, La Roche-Posay, La Haye-Decartes,
  # Loches, Montrichard, Vierzon, Bourges, Moulins, Digoin,
! # Paray-le-Monial, Montceau-les-Mines, Chalons-sur-Saone, Arbois,
! # Dole, Morez, St-Claude, and Collognes (Haute-Savioe).
  Rule  France  1941    only    -       May      5       0:00   2:00    M # Midsummer
  # Shanks & Pottenger say this transition occurred at Oct 6 1:00,
  # but go with Denis Excoffier (1997-12-12),
--- 1150,1160 ----
  # The French rules for 1941-1944 were not used in Paris, but Shanks & Pottenger
  # write that they were used in Monaco and in many French locations.
  # Le Corre writes that the upper limit of the free zone was Arneguy, Orthez,
! # Mont-de-Marsan, Bazas, Langon, Lamothe-Montravel, Mareuil, La
! # Rochefoucauld, Champagne-Mouton, La Roche-Posay, La Haye-Descartes,
  # Loches, Montrichard, Vierzon, Bourges, Moulins, Digoin,
! # Paray-le-Monial, Montceau-les-Mines, Chalon-sur-Saone, Dole, Arbois,
! # Morez, Saint-Claude, and Collonges (Haute-Savoie).
  Rule  France  1941    only    -       May      5       0:00   2:00    M # Midsummer
  # Shanks & Pottenger say this transition occurred at Oct 6 1:00,
  # but go with Denis Excoffier (1997-12-12),

Re: [tz] leap second 2012-06-30T23:59:60Z

Thanks.   Assuming that there's no-one here who knows French geography
and objects to these changes (that would certainly not be me), they should
appear in the next update.

kre