In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rob Seaman writes:
>On Aug 11, 2005, at 9:51 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

>A hurried solution that ignores pertinent input is extremely unlikely
>to prove acceptable.

I've asked now twice, and I guess that I should get the clue from
your continued non-response, but I would prefer a completely
straight answer from you:

Will you support a proposal that keeps leap-second (or -minutes),
but mandates that they be determined 40 or 50 years in advance ?

If you do, will you help write it ?

--
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.

Reply via email to