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: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 21:12:59 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Subject: Re: [avail for test] readline-4.2-1 also xpm and xpm-nox
Message-ID: <20010603211259.C30692@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
References: <F206NsokLQ8aZRhQdOg0000e15b AT hotmail DOT com> <3B1AA444 DOT BA3AA2FE AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To: <3B1AA444.BA3AA2FE@ece.gatech.edu>; from cwilson@ece.gatech.edu on Sun, Jun 03, 2001 at 04:55:32PM -0400

On Sun, Jun 03, 2001 at 04:55:32PM -0400, Charles S. Wilson wrote:
>No.  They come from different source code bases.  Yes, technically the
>readline-4.1 source code is already on the cygwin mirrors -- but if you
>install cygwin's readline-4.2 package (which, under your plan contains
>the 4.1 DLL's) and you click 'install source' -- then you should get
>BOTH sets of source code, not just the 4.2 code.  However, I don't want
>to comingle the source code; I believe that's a bad idea and sets a bad
>precedent.  Therefore, if the 4.1 and 4.2 source packages are to remain
>separate, then the 4.1 and 4.2 binary dists must remain separate.
>
>Anyway, I've already promised not to upgrade 4.2 from its current 'test'
>status until the only official external dependent (postgres) is
>ready...so what's the problem?

I wouldn't mind bending the rules and including an older version of the
dlls with your packages ad infinitum.  If we expect people to do the right
thing by hand we're sure to be disappointed.

However, I'll certainly live with your judgment on this one.

>(*) these continual complaints without offers of assistance are my major
>pet peeve with this community.  You have no idea how many off-list
>complaints I get.  My contribs are FREE, dammit.  You're free to use
>them as you like.  You're free to fork them and do your own versions. 
>You're NOT free to demand that I sacrifice more of my limited time to do
>things your way.  This is not Burger King -- "you can^W CAN'T have it
>your way".  I'm usually pretty reasonable -- but many of the demands
>I've been subjected to lately are not, and I've just about reached my
>tolerance level.

I can sympathize.  It seems like 99% of the posts here have exactly the
wrong attitude.  It's gimmee, gimmee, gimme, hey why aren't you gimmeeing
it to me fast enough.

I should put a filter in for this mailing list which blocks mail which
contains the words "...it seems to me..." I think we could probably cut
traffic by 50%.

cgf

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