Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 12:09:23 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Cc: tolj AT wapme-systems DOT de
Subject: Re: [RFC] cygwin.[org|net] domain for Cygwin SourceForge
Message-ID: <20010601120923.A3111@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com, tolj AT wapme-systems DOT de
References: <3B15898D DOT A88A6522 AT wapme-systems DOT de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To: <3B15898D.A88A6522@wapme-systems.de>; from tolj@wapme-systems.de on Thu, May 31, 2001 at 02:00:13AM +0200

On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 02:00:13AM +0200, Stipe Tolj wrote:
>hope you remember my name as a mailing list contributor and maintainer
>of the "Cygwin Porting Project".
>
>As I stated a couple of times we are about to re-launch the "Cygwin
>Porting Project" and it seems that we will setup a dedicated machine as
>"Cygwin SourceForge Server" which should be a central repository for all
>available Cygwin ports and the corresponding projects of the porters.

If you wish to contribute, Cygwin actively needs people to contribute
their skills as programmers.  We have enough server resources and
bandwidth to continue to provide binary ports of the 80+ packages that
are currently installed by our ever-evolving setup program.  In fact, as
I have mentioned a couple of times here, we are going to be improving the
net connection to sources.redhat.com soon.

So, with regard to hardware, we are set for the foreseeable future.  In
fact, it has never been hardware that was the bottleneck for this project.
What we are lacking is volunteers to support packages or programmers to
advance the state of the Cygwin DLL.

If you are looking for a package to adopt, you might consider maintaining
"joe" since a number of people have expressed interest, although none of
them was interested enough to actually maintain it.

I suspect that we will be adding apache to the mix of packages that will
be offered by setup.exe as soon as we have the facility to categorize
packages and make them optional.  I hope that you will consider being
the cygwin maintainer for this package at this point.  In fact, you
might want to consider contributing the necessary bits to setup.exe
which will make this dream a reality.

I agree with Earnie that I don't see any need for what you seem to be
proposing.  There are already facilities available for doing what you
want to do at sources.redhat.com.  You seem to be offering services that
no one has asked for, and if they did ask for them, then they properly
belong within the sphere of the rest of the project on
sources.redhat.com.

So, I see that only confusion will result from your plans.  If you are,
however, intent on going forward, please make sure that you make it very
very clear that your project is not sanctioned by Red Hat, the Cygwin
team, or (I presume) any of the people who are already maintaining
packages for cygwin.  This should be in bold letters on your page.

In this vein, I would also request that you change the name of the page
to add the word "Unofficial" to your title.  I was never comfortable
with the official sounding title on your original page especially given
the conspicuous lack of obvious pointers back to the cygwin home page.

With regard to your request that I relinquish a cygwin.* domain to you:
Red Hat will not sanction the use of the name "cygwin" in domains that
we do not control.  Also, given my above reservations, I do not
personally consider it to be a good idea at all.

cgf

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