Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@gmail.com> writes:
> The scenario where we could unambiguously include time zones is where
> the symbols are unique. If we were to include *all* uniquely-named
> symbols, that would minimize the number of complaints about missing
> zones, whilst evading the cases where the symbols are non-unique.
> That might be worth considering, though it'll certainly attract
> complaints in that some odd-ball zones would be included whilst
> well-known ones wouldn't.
That sounds good in the abstract ... however, consider that two of the
ambiguous abbreviations are EST and CST, which means that taking a hard
line would piss off every American east of the Mississippi, likewise
over half of Canada, not to mention some proportion of Australians.
Can you say "user revolt"? Projects have been forked for less.
We can't just refuse to deal with this ambiguity. We have to have some
very-low-pain way to install settings that will please those large
fractions of our user base. Moreover, if that very-low-pain way isn't
the exact same way it's been done for the last half dozen releases,
you'll already have managed to annoy those selfsame large fractions.
You'd better have a good reason for changing it.
regards, tom lane