This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author belopolsky
Recipients belopolsky, docs@python, georg.brandl, napik, techtonik
Date 2011-01-11.19:42:06
SpamBayes Score 8.03432e-09
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <>
In-reply-to <>
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Georg Brandl <> wrote:
> It seems to me that the quoted function from bzr ...
> would be very helpful to add to the `time` module docs as an example.

The problem with this function is the same as with the doc patches
that have been proposed so far.  It is subtly wrong.  See issue
#1647654.  Specifically, see the link to a bug in Hg mentioned in

> I have to agree with the OP that the current state of the docs is not as clear as it could be.

In some ways the state of the docs is reflective of the state of the
code.  C/POSIX API on which time module design is based is not very
well suited to the age of smart phones and distributed VC systems.
The whole idea that there is a static "system timezone" is absurd when
a "system" is in your pocket or in the cloud.

I agree that the docs can be improved, but I don't see patches that
would constitute an improvement.  I've explained what I would see as
an improvement in my prior comments.
Date User Action Args
2011-01-11 19:42:09belopolskysetrecipients: + belopolsky, georg.brandl, techtonik, napik, docs@python
2011-01-11 19:42:06belopolskylinkissue7229 messages
2011-01-11 19:42:06belopolskycreate