Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 19:25:00 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Vesa Pekka Paatero <vpaatero AT cc DOT hut DOT fi>
X-Sender: vpaatero AT alpha DOT hut DOT fi
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: About Cygwin 1.0
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.10.10105261839010.10889-100000@alpha.hut.fi>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Hello!

Thank you for the free Cygwin software. One thing I'd like to talk about:
I was surprised to find no information on your pages (especially FAQ)
about the reasons why you have not released the stable Cygwin 1.0
via the net.
  Is it that you want people to use the unstable versions in order
to hasten the development of future versions (by their bug reports)?
In the spirit of the Gnu Public Licence, that would seem immoral to me.
If the public develops the software (under GPL) with their contributions,
they should also be allowed to enjoy the fruits (and not be constrained to
keep toiling with bugs when a stable version exists).
  So please, let me know the true reasons why Cygwin 1.0 is not
distributed on the net.

  If people could more readily use stable versions in their developments,
perhaps Cygwin's reputation would improve (as it pertains to reliability).

I thank you and I wish you success with your Cygwin affairs.

  Regards,

   Vesa Paatero


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple