On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 9:12 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote: > On Mon, 1 Oct 2012 16:06:18 +0200 > Lennart Regebro <rege...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Actually, that's not a bad idea. My original idea was to warn if it *was* >> outdated, but since there is no way to check that, I scratched that idea. >> But as I have pointed out several times, a database that is shipped with >> Python is almost guaranteed to be outdated, so yeah, we could just warn >> *all the time*. :-) >> >> I like this idea. It gives an incentive to update: Get rid of the annoying >> warning. > > Well, no, it is just silly. If we ship a database, that's because we > think it is good enough. A warning is just a nuisance here. We don't > display warnings when the installed Python version is too old. >
My thought was that it's better to have *something* always available, that has a decent chance of being "good enough" in a lot of cases (and if it's good enough for you, just silence the warning), than to noisily fail because we can't provide a perfect solution due to political idiocy. Or worse, to *silently* be wrong because someone assumed we had provided a perfect solution without looking too hard. I had no idea the Olson database was updated so often until Dirkjan posted about there being 21 updates in 2009 alone. For most of my uses, I would probably be a warning-silencer. And that wouldn't bother me; I would actually appreciate being reminded now and then that things may have changed since the last time I did something with timezones, and that I need to be careful of such changes. But, of course, that's just me, and it was my idea anyway ;) _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
