Mail Archives: cygwin/2003/01/27/16:30:05
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 08:15:01AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
>Bill, IMO you are missing a key point:
>
>Cygwin is volunteer maintained. No release manager volunteer, and no
>stable release maintainer (who will maintain stable packages after they
>become stale) have stepped up.
>
>The *only* way you will get a stable release is to:
>1) offer to take on all the extra workload needed.
>2) ask (nicely :}) for disk space at sources.redhat.com to hold (1)
>possibly outdated copy of each package.
>3) patch setup.exe, or talk nicely to me :} to give it the functionality
>needed to support such an endeavour.
>
>I've spoken in favour of such an arrangement before, but didn't have the
>time or personal need to justify making it happen.
>
>Oh, and if a 'stable' cygwin became the most downloaded one, I'm sure
>you would get more assistance from the community - but trying to
>convince us to do it is pretty pointless: we are already contributing
>time and effort, and there has been plenty of opportunity for an extant
>maintainer to pipe up with "I'll do it".
I will provide space on sources.redhat.com, if someone is interested in
doing this.
For the record, I have no interest in changing anything. DJ and I were
well aware of the fact that the Cygwin release process would be
different from Red Hat or Debian when we instituted the current policy.
I don't see anything particularly broken in the process now* so I'm not
going to be making any fixes. However, I'll support someone with disk
space if they want to experiment with doing things differently.
cgf
*But I will, if pressed, offer many more opinions on this thread, so be
warned.
--
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 -