[LEAPSECS] Schedule for success

[Poul-Henning Kamp]

In message <CA98D228-C36E-4E2A-838E-76F83C1435D3 at noao.edu>, Rob Seaman writes:


>Nobody other than geeks has a problem with leap seconds.  Geeks are  

>competent to deal with what residual problems there may be.  Therefore  

>leap seconds must die.


We in the "realitybased community" know this to be not true.


>Rather than getting tangled into logical pretzels, why don't we simply  

>seek a better solution than the ITU's slipshod proposal?


Because ITU's proposal is fine for our needs, only too bad the implementation
will be delayed a decade relative to the initial proposal.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk at FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.