Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , 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 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/