On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 4:36 AM, Ole Streicher wrote: > The canonical source for leap seconds is the IERS. Our current plan was > to take the leap second list from there and build our package from this > (as it is done in the casacore-data upstream). This guaranteed that we > always have the actual definition (... as long as we do our updated > package ASAP). > > When we switch that to tzdata, then we get the leap second from a place > that is not strictly the original source, but may have some delay: first > the tzdata upstream package needs to be updated, and then it needs to be > packaged (... and possibly backported). > > So my question is: how safe is it to assum that this whole process is > quick (let's say: a few weeks)? If someone works later on Stretch and > has an outdated leap second, this could cause problems. Especially if he > has no direct information about the actuality of the leap second > definition (which he would have in the case of an leap second package > taking the value directly from IERS -- we could use the date of the > announcement as version number there).
Where does the IERS data come from? I think the tzdata version of the data comes from the IETF: https://www.ietf.org/timezones/data/leap-seconds.list I would suggest discussing it with the tzdata maintainer and tzdata upstream. It may be that you end up packaging the leap seconds data in a new package, or it may be that you end up leaving them in the tzdata package. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
