Mail Archives: cygwin/2002/05/22/17:04:05
Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 02:14:27PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
>
>>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>
>>>Why are you contributing to cygutils rather than cygwin itself?
>>>
>>Actually, Chris, I think col *does* belong in cygutils. On linux, it is
>>found in the util-linux package -- a random grab bag of lots of small
>>and useful, or small and not-so-useful, or small but
>>totally-cygwin-inappropriate programs.
>>
>
> I am trying to force this kind of justification when someone suggests
> that something go into cygutils.
>
> Obviously cygutils is your package. Maybe you feel comfortable doing
> the thinking for people who want to add something to your package
> but I'd prefer that there be some kind of discussion on why a tool does
> not belong in the main distribution as part of the initial suggestion.
Agreed. I thought that dawillis actually *started* that discussion, and
you were objecting to his point:
dawillis wrote:
>> The
>>cygutil package seemed to be the appropriate location since other BSD
>>derived utilities, such as cal, are packaged there.
So, since I knew -- and no one else was privy to this knowledge -- that
I had originally planned to include col *myself*, I provided *my*
reasoning for including col in cygutils. (Since you didn't seem to like
dawillis's reason -- or perhaps you missed it?)
> Otherwise, I will never be convinced that people aren't suggesting
> adding things to cygutils because it seems somehow "easier" to do this
> than submit a real package. Either that or they just don't understand
> that it is relatively easy to get a package into the main cygwin
> distribution.
Both points are probably true, and your vigilance against them is
appreciated (if possibly unwarranted in this particular case).
--Chuck
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -