On 22 Apr 2016 15:42, Chris Leonard wrote:
> I can't pretend that I have gone through the details or done any of my
> own due diligence, but I am inclined to endorse as a good-faith
> effort.  I must admit it feels like a scary large (cross-cutting)
> patch and on a field that frequently draws complaints, but I don't
> think that an incremental approach would serve any purpose in this
> case, so perhaps it is best to just rip off the band-aid all-at-once
> and see what happens to people's calendar programs out there.  It
> could either cause a big sigh of relief or absolute mayhem for end
> users, but I think it is going to be fairly visible, so we should hear
> back one way or the other.

i forgot to mention it in the commit message, but i did a spot check with
`cal` and the vast majority of locales rendered the same.  the few that
didn't (i want to say <10) i double checked and they all seemed like we
wanted the change.

i agree that just letting users post feedback is OK.
-mike