| delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 10:07:58AM -0700, Christopher Wingert wrote: >Again, not production, this was to highlight a point and to enhance (I >would assume) the most common use case (file to file rsync). > >Plenty of solutions for a good patch, complete the Windows version of >stat() or call the Cygwin version if the Window's version fails. > >Since I don't have any confidence that the "Cygwin organization" will >accept any patch I write (per Faylor), I really have no incentive to do >the job right. Actually, I pointed you at the web site so that you could find out what needs to be done for a patch to be accepted. From http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2010-06/msg00103.html: "Btw, if you are considering a patch, you should check out the link on the website for what you need to do there. In a nutshell: we have a procedure similar to the FSF except that changes need to be assigned to Red Hat." I thought I could use a little short-hand there since you professed to be familiar with other open source projects but maybe I shouldn't have assumed. For a non-trivial patch to be accepted into the code base you need to assign the rights to Red Hat. I mentioned this now so that the paperwork could potentially be in process while the patch was being worked on. The Contributing link on the web site has more details. Also, if you want to avoid further confusion about who is doing what on the project you can check out the Community link. cgf -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
| webmaster | delorie software privacy |
| Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |