| delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
> >I think your solution is well stated. Does anyone know who was > >maintaining the old patch to make, so that a discussion with that > >person could be made more substantial on a technical level? > > And ^^^this^^^ is a perfect example of why this discussion is so > frustrating. > > Does someone *really* have to tell you who was "maintaining the old > patch"? If you really need to be told this then you really don't have > the right to an opinion on this subject at all since you clearly haven't > been paying any attention. I think you are all to knowledgable about cygwin and should step back and think about people that use Cygwin as a black box and understand absolutly nothing about it or it's development process. The frustration you are expressing is understandable to me. However, with a little managerial effort on your part, you could use your knowledge (if you so choose) to help the rest of us organize a productive way to develop a patch to the upstream make. I thought Corinna spoke very well on this matter, and is why I even bothered responding to this list. Bob Rossi -- 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/
| webmaster | delorie software privacy |
| Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |