[Development] Heads up! Fixing the build system on Windows

[Welbourne Edward]

> On 01/04/16 07:49, Thiago Macieira wrote:
>> I want to point this out:
>>
>> On quinta-feira, 31 de março de 2016 22:48:35 PDT Thiago Macieira wrote:
>>> On sexta-feira, 1 de abril de 2016 05:16:33 PDT Tvete Paul wrote:
>>
>> It's still March 31st.

Lars Knoll replied:
> You’re just living in the wrong time zone ;-)

Clearly we need a hastily-written RFC, to be published today if at all
possible, describing an extension to the e-mail protocol that ensures
delivery *after* some stipulated local-time, so that we can all (in
future years) include a suitable header in our early morning mails to
ensure they don't get *delivered* until the recipient considers the new
day to have begun.  That would avoid potential confusion of the kind
Thiago fell foul of, provided he uses a mailer implementing that RFC.

Since this RFC must, naturally, cope with arbitrary delivery times, it
shall need a section on what to do about DST transitions.  Fortunately,
this should be easy enough
 * for spring-forward, to be "after" any time in the elided interval is
   to be after the interval;
 * for fall-back, to be "after" a time in the repeated interval, we can
   conservatively insist on being after the second instance of it.
Other time-zone transitions should be treated analogously; I leave this
as an exercise for the reader (and am not volunteering to implement it).

	Eddy.