Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@sources.redhat.com Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 10:52:21 -0500 Message-Id: <200102151552.KAA31074@envy.delorie.com> X-Authentication-Warning: envy.delorie.com: dj set sender to dj@envy.delorie.com using -f From: DJ Delorie To: jik@curl.com CC: cygwin@cygwin.com In-reply-to: <20010215140905.27743.qmail@lizard.curl.com> (message from Jonathan Kamens on 15 Feb 2001 09:09:05 -0500) Subject: Re: cygwin and GPL (again) References: <20010214232946.A28167@redhat.com> <003701c0970a$cd6fd7a0$17bbca97@Arda> <20010215000001.A28498@redhat.com> <20010215140905.27743.qmail@lizard.curl.com> > After reading the descriptions of the cygwin and cygwin-developers > list, I got the distinct impression that I don't belong on the > cygwin-developers list. Perhaps it's time to reconsider the purposes of the lists? I would be happy to treat the cygwin-developer list as appropriate for any topic about the internals or improvement of the cygwin runtime or support files (including documentation, and people interested in learning about the internals for the purposes of porting to cygwin), and leave the cygwin list for people who are just using the runtime, without interest in how it works. The DJGPP lists work like this. The cygwin-apps list would then be for people to discuss the porting of apps to cygwin, when it doesn't involve knowing too much about the internals of the cygwin runtime itself. We should expect crossover anyway, but it's easier to be lenient than try to define the boundaries of the lists too precisely. As for keeping things on-topic, it's easy enough to politely say "this discussion belongs on [foo], please move it there" (if it's a faq, along with an answer, if possible ;) than to start holy wars about list topics. -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple