In message <[email protected]>, Rob Seaman writes:
>Nobody other than geeks has a problem with leap seconds. Geeks are >competent to deal with what residual problems there may be. Therefore >leap seconds must die. We in the "realitybased community" know this to be not true. >Rather than getting tangled into logical pretzels, why don't we simply >seek a better solution than the ITU's slipshod proposal? Because ITU's proposal is fine for our needs, only too bad the implementation will be delayed a decade relative to the initial proposal. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 [email protected] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. _______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list [email protected] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
