Remove Gigasecond; it's worthless in Java.

[jtigger]

All the interesting date math that this exercise probably brings in other languages is roundly covered with the built-in java.time package.

Worse, every solution I've seen submitted is nearly identical and so there's no room for discussion.

Unless we see this as a way to introduce that part of the standard library (which generally isn't the goal), this exercise doesn't yield the good stuff we're looking for.

[matthewmorgan]

That makes sense to me. Plenty of more valuable exercises...!

[jtigger]

@exercism/java are we missing anything, here?

[stkent]

It might still be useful to leave this in for comparison with the date/time handling of other languages. Once exercises are assigned difficulties, this could be a starter exercise that pleasantly surprises newcomers to Java.

[kotp]

In Ruby there isn't even date/time considerations, aside from what the test chose to use for it.

[jtigger]

@stkent said:

It might still be useful to leave this in for comparison with the date/time handling of other languages. Once exercises are assigned difficulties, this could be a starter exercise that pleasantly surprises newcomers to Java.

Well, shoot; that's fair. Yeah, we can take a peek at how the Ruby track placed it too, when the time comes.

[jtigger]

Per this discussion, we're keeping it.

[stkent]

FWIW, I watched someone complete this exercise today, and it was the first time they discovered and used multiple constructors, and the first time they learned you could call into one constructor from another!