Re: Updating our timezone code in the back branches

Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 9:09 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> So I think it behooves us to apply these changes to the back branches
>> while we can still do it in a leisurely fashion, rather than waiting
>> until our hands are forced. I'd like to do it in the next week or so
>> so that we can get in a little bit of buildfarm and manual testing
>> before the next set of back-branch releases in August.

> This seems reasonable. Except the 2016e one which hasn't seen master yet.
> But it would definitely make sense to try to get 2016e into 9.6 ASAP, so we
> can get it into the next beta/rc (not the one on it's way now, but the one
> after that).

I think that the 2016e change is not actually relevant to us; it's just
introducing a no-op DST transition into the data files in 2037. If our
version of zic were being used to produce zone files that Qt would read,
it might be important, but that seems pretty unlikely. So we should sync
it eventually but I'm not in much of a hurry.

regards, tom lane