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: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 13:19:52 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Cygwin: Open or Closed System? (was: two problems with cygwin's zip)
Message-ID: <20010627131952.A22764@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <993648794 DOT 12881 DOT ezmlm AT sources DOT redhat DOT com> <3B39F797 DOT 7000608 AT gruntose DOT com> <20010627131157 DOT C22088 AT redhat DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To: <20010627131157.C22088@redhat.com>; from cgf@redhat.com on Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 01:11:57PM -0400

On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 01:11:57PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>i'm satisfied for now that the polarization against win32 wildcards is
>>such that only a patch which can be analyzed would even have a chance
>>of changing any opinions.  expect that the issue may re-arise and
>>include some code for consideration in a month or two.
>
>I'm sorry that that statement caused you to feel that way.  It was
>a very poor choice of language on my part.

Hah!  Poor reading skills strike again.  I didn't fully parse your words above.

You are 100% correct.  A patch is without a doubt the most persuasive argument
you can offer.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/