<i18n dev> RFR: 8049343: (tz) Support tzdata2014f

[Masayoshi Okutsu]

We used to make name changes in the root (base) bundle as part of time 
zone data maintenance and deter only translations. But if you want to 
handle name changes later, that would be fine. It's your call.

Thanks,
Masayoshi

On 8/21/2014 5:05 PM, Aleksej Efimov wrote:
> Masayoshi,
> I agree that we should change the long names to match the new short 
> names introduced by tzdata.
> But I suggest to log a different CR for such activity to handle long 
> name changes and their translations (this activity is slightly out of 
> tzdata update scope). Does it make sense?
>
> -Aleksej
>
> On 08/21/2014 06:32 AM, Masayoshi Okutsu wrote:
>> I think the long names of the Australia time zones should be 
>> revisited to be consistent with the abbreviation changes. The new 
>> abbreviations follow the S[tandard] and D[aylight saving] convention 
>> rather than the S[tandard] and S[ummer time] one. The long names, 
>> such as "Eastern Summer Time (Queensland)", no longer make sense.
>>
>> On the other hand, you will need to access impact of the name 
>> changes, including abbreviations. Also, if you change the long names, 
>> their translations will need to be changed as well.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Masayoshi
>>
>> On 8/20/2014 11:59 PM, Aleksej Efimov wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Please, review the tzdata2014f integration (with tzdata2014e related 
>>> changes included too) [1] fix to JDK9: 
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8049343/9/webrev.01/
>>>
>>> The tzdata2014f changes are extensive and relates mostly to timezone 
>>> short names changes + "Asia/Srednekolymsk" time zone were added.
>>> Almost complete list of changes can be found in the JBS bug 
>>> description [1], plus some changes wasn't documented in tzdata 
>>> release notes - for such cases raw tzdata diff was used for the 
>>> names modifications.
>>>
>>> Two issues with JSR310 implementation were discovered during 
>>> integration process:
>>> First issue is related to the internal representation of the '24:00' 
>>> value. The JSR310 implementation treats this value as a next day 
>>> 00:00 time. The workaround already exists in JSR310 code for similar 
>>> entries and this failure is resolved in similar way [2] as part of 
>>> this update.
>>> For the second issue JDK-8051641 [3] was filled and 
>>> 'sun/util/calendar/zi/TestZoneInfo310.java' test is the only one 
>>> that fails with this tzdata.
>>> Other time zone related tests [4] passes without failures.
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>> Aleksej
>>>
>>> [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049343
>>> [2] 
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8049343/9/webrev.01/src/java.base/share/classes/sun/util/calendar/ZoneInfoFile.java.patch
>>> [3] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051641
>>> [4] TZ related test sets: test/sun/util/calendar 
>>> test/java/util/Calendar test/sun/util/resources/TimeZone 
>>> test/sun/util/calendar test/java/util/TimeZone test/java/time\ 
>>> test/java/util/Formatter test/closed/java/util/Calendar 
>>> test/closed/java/util/TimeZone
>>
>