X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<45C6ABAB.8030500@cygwin.com>
Date:	Sun, 04 Feb 2007 22:59:39 -0500
From:	"Larry Hall (Cygwin)" <reply-to-list-only-lh AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.9) Gecko/20061221 Fedora/1.5.0.9-1.fc4.remi Thunderbird/1.5.0.9 Mnenhy/0.7.4.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Eliminating -mno-cygwin from gcc.
References:	<020d01c748b4$62d8b170$2e08a8c0 AT CAM DOT ARTIMI DOT COM> <20070205030939 DOT GB24653 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <45C6A0DC DOT 3010104 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> <20070205033101 DOT GE24653 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <45C6A793 DOT 8020008 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net>
In-Reply-To:	<45C6A793.8020008@users.sourceforge.net>
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.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

Yaakov (Cygwin Ports) wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
> 
> Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> If you have been reading this list for any length of time then it should
>> be obvious that merely mentioning something in cygwin-announce is not an
>> adequate way to let people know about serious changes.
> 
> Trust me I know; my question is why this is being handled differently
> than other major changes (e.g. bash), or if you're looking for a new way
> in general of notification, particularly as carrying out the change will
> confuse much fewer people than leaving the status-quo.

The discussion has been to augment 'setup.exe' in a way as to provide users
with feedback about "important" package changes in general.  It has come up
in the context of the gcc change but would have to apply generally.
"Important" would be defined by the maintainer by some mechanism.
Presumably, every release of package 'foo' does not trigger the "important"
flag. ;-)

-- 
Larry Hall                              http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc.                      (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
216 Dalton Rd.                          (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746

_____________________________________________________________________

A: Yes.
 > Q: Are you sure?
 >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
 >>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?

--
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 -