Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender:	cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID:	<5DABF7424840D411BE9600508B6621F803794E7E@exchukthis02.experian.co.uk>
From:	"Ebrey, Carl" <Carl DOT Ebrey AT uk DOT experian DOT com>
To:	"'cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com'" <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject:	RE: FW: bash completion (was: RE: Units)
Date:	Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:24:38 -0000
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Mailer:	Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)

I couldn't agree more.  I was merely trying to clarify what was being said.
I hoped that my post was clear enough to not imply that I was suggesting it
myself.

Carl

-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:cgf AT redhat DOT com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 4:18 PM
To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: FW: bash completion (was: RE: Units)

<snip>

As Chuck has pointed out, we are clearly not going to approve a category
which is essentially a concatenation of two existing categories.  And, it
doesn't make sense to me to use this particular package for a departure
from current practices.

cgf


=======================================================================
Information in this email and any attachments are confidential, and may
not be copied or used by anyone other than the addressee, nor disclosed
to any third party without our permission.  There is no intention to
create any legally binding contract or other commitment through the use
of this email.

Experian Limited (registration number 653331).  
Registered office: Talbot House, Talbot Street, Nottingham NG1 5HF

- Raw text -