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, 25 Aug 2001 15:29:50 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: I suggest creation of a list of package maintainers
Message-ID: <20010825152950.X21709@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <007301c12d9a$5b4449a0$2a00000a AT max>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To: <007301c12d9a$5b4449a0$2a00000a@max>; from max@bowshernet.freeserve.co.uk on Sat, Aug 25, 2001 at 08:15:36PM +0100

On Sat, Aug 25, 2001 at 08:15:36PM +0100, Max Bowsher wrote:
>Dear List,
>    I notice that some cygwin packages are not current with the main
>versions. I believe (as there is no CYGWIN-PATCHES directory in most of the
>source tarballs) that the build is mostly OOTB. No doubt there are many on
>the cygwin list like me, whose skills are not up to complex porting jobs,
>but could help out with mundane maintenance. To help this, I suggest a list
>of maintained and unmaintained packages. I suggest that all package
>maintainers send a note (need not be any more than the name of the
>package(s) you maintain) to me at max AT bowshernet DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk and once I
>have recieved several replies, I will publish a collated list on the web.
>
>!!! Comments? Do you think this would be a useful resource?

No.  I don't think it is a useful resource.  We have a mailing list for
this.  I know who the maintainers are.  AFAIK, all of the packages are
maintained.

This does not mean that every package is guaranteed to be up-to-date.  It
undoubtedly means that the maintainer is maintaining things in his spare
time and gets to things as time permits.

I have thought about posting the list of maintainers externally but I've
always rejected this idea since I know that the result would be more
clueless people contacting maintainers directly rather than sending
email to cygwin AT cygwin DOT com with their concerns.

>As I see it, the main use of such a list would be to prevent people from
>stepping on each others toes regarding maintaining packages.

I think you are confused as to the way things are working.  There is
little toe stepping going on.  I did upload a textutils package a while
ago and surprised the textutils maintainer but, since I'm one of the few
people who can do this, any toe stepping is going to be pretty limited.

There was some recent confusion about perl maintainership when the perl
maintainer went silent but that was all handled amicably, apparently.

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/