Mail Archives: cygwin/2002/05/23/15:52:39
On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 09:22:19PM +0200, Schaible, Jorg wrote:
>Hi Chuck,
>
>>I know this. However, right now I do not want to do that --
>>not because
>> I'm a control freak or anything, but I just haven't figured out the
>>best way to handle commits from multiple developers (authorization,
>>approval (reversals?) etc). I'm usually pretty responsive to updates
>>and such (no complaints so far) and really, there are only three
>>contributors other than me -- there haven't really been a whole lot of
>>updates to deal with.
>>
>>I don't WANT cygutils to grow so large that we need multiple approved
>>committers and "community standards" and suchlike. For now, the three
>>people who this actually affects can continue to send me their
>>patches,
>>and I'll apply them. If my latency gets too large, or I hear
>>complaints
>>from those three poeple, then I'll re-evaluate...
>
>I thought there are already more submaintainers and with David the
>package is obviously growing. Basically I don't like very much posting
>diffs to my own utilities and keeping my own CVS developer repository.
>Additionally I supposed that your inbox is quite full enough with such
>kind of mails (regarding the number of Cygwin packages you're
>maintaining). But - as I said - it was just a proposal open for
>discussion. Finally these utilities are not THAT important anyway :)
You don't have to keep "your own" CVS repository. You can just use the
one on sources.redhat.com and submit patches against that.
If you have a project that is active maybe it doesn't belong in
cygutils. Maybe it should be a cygwin package. I'd be happy to create
new directories in the cygwin-apps repository if required.
cgf
--
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 -