-------- In message <[email protected]>, Brooks Harris writes:
>> Because that is the only sane thing for them to do, given the (broken) >> timekeeping in the software they run. >Well, broken in what way for what purpose? An awful lot of people use >it.. Yeah, and more insects eat shit every minute than there ever will be humans on the planet. Quality is not a mater of majority. >> The fundamental question about leapseconds is not about where Rob can >> find the sun at noon, but about teaching an awful lot of rather crap >> programmers how to cope with a infrequent and intractable complexity >> on short notice. >I don't think its fair to insult all the programmers. That's why I wrote "an awful lot" rather than "all". >> It seems like Daniels scheduling on this one may show us which is more >> important. > >Sorry, lost track of what that comment refers to.. As far as I can tell, Daniel Gambis would have had no trouble justifying scheduling this leapsecond at either the preceeding or succeesding new years eve, but he decided to stick not to blunt the impact and scheduled it Tue/Wed July 1st. I'm glad he did, it's the only way to end the prophetizing: What ever happens or don't happen on july 1st will be valuable *factual* input to the ITU decicion making process. -- 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] https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
