delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: cygwin/2006/08/16/11:36:03

X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 11:35:47 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: change in behavior of make from 3.80 to 3.81
Message-ID: <20060816153546.GG13147@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <467C77F6373BDE4BB16A3E8A62C0395567A111 AT Exchserv DOT hatteras DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <467C77F6373BDE4BB16A3E8A62C0395567A111@Exchserv.hatteras.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 11:03:47AM -0400, Brian Hassink wrote:
>Respectfully,
>
>Doesn't this just push the maintenance effort elsewhere? Suppose the
>upstream maintainer has "no fun" either?

Read the mailing list archives.

>There are obviously a lot of users in the cygwin community using this
>feature of cygwin make and would like to see it continue to be
>supported.
>
>Why can't a new maintainer step forward to do so?  If the interests of
>the current maintainer diverge from those of the larger community, then
>perhaps it's time for the maintainer to consider stepping aside?
>
>Again, I'm saying/asking this respectfully.

I appreciate the respectfullness but I'd feel really respected if you
had indicated that you'd at least tried any of the many solutions to
this issue.

So far, the responses just seem to be coming from change-averse people
who don't read cygwin-announce and update their systems using setup.exe
in an almost knee-jerk fashion.  The more I see the reaction to this
change, the more I'm convinced that people in the Cygwin "user
community" need a wakeup call.

While you see a bunch of people who are "impacted" by my decision.  I
see people who don't understand what free software really is and don't
practice anything remotely like safe software practices.  So, perhaps an
ancillary benefit of this change to 'make' is that it got people looking
at how they use cygwin and thinking about the assumptions in their
dependency on same.

If the change to make (and cygwin's change to exe handling <?>) really
does result in something like a "cygwin fork" (which is hard to imagine
given the obvious fact that no one wants to touch source code) then I
guess that will be a lesson for me.  Otherwise, I'm going to wait out
this tempest and see what happens when the tea cools down in a few
months.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019