Mail Archives: cygwin-apps/2001/06/12/11:32:45
On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 12:36:32PM +0100, David Starks-Browning wrote:
>On Tuesday 12 Jun 01, Lapo Luchini writes:
>> I'm no rsync big expert right now (the "port" was OOB), but I plan to be
>> (to correct also that spurious error message).
>
>You should probably subscribe to the rsync list if you're going to be
>the Cygwin rsync maintainer. My impression, from that list, is that
>the read errors happen often, to a lot of people, on different
>platforms, and have nothing to do with Cygwin.
>
>I'm concerned about the growth of a "full" Cygwin install (which is
>the only type of install we "support", remember) and so I'm not sure
>why applications that already build OOTB should go into setup. I'm
>also concerned about the burden on the cygwin list of rsync read error
>reports.
>
>That said, I use rsync on Cygwin all the time, and it's a darn useful
>thing to have. So it's hard to say that it doesn't belong.
I have similar misgivings about the size of the distribution. I'm trying
to reorganize setup.exe to accomodate categories but real work keeps
intruding.
However, rsync is a very useful utility, so I'd like to see it in the
distribution.
I am also very concerned by the incremental jump in cygwin mailing list
traffic that shows up every time we introduce a new package. The cygwin
mailing list is responsible for a complete swamping of mail list
facilities on sources.redhat.com. I really don't know what to do about
it. I'm tempted to institute a "no more than X messages per week" policy
or something.
Anyway, after this, I'd like to declare a moratorium on new packages, at
least until setup.exe is a little more intelligent. This won't reduce
the inevitable "How do I joe my file" messages but it should cut back
slightly on the "How do I just install what I want" messages.
cgf
- Raw text -