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, 14 Nov 2001 17:43:35 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: no more package moratorium?
Message-ID: <20011114224335.GA10472@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <F224RS8LbyiDFkBfMPA00001d21 AT hotmail DOT com> <007f01c16cde$5016de20$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20011114124323 DOT C24614 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <049601c16d58$d8565250$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <049601c16d58$d8565250$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i

On Thu, Nov 15, 2001 at 09:08:08AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Corinna Vinschen" <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
>> - cygwin-developers discusses if the package should become part of
>>   the distro and chooses a person from cygwin-developers as approver.
>
>Nope. I don't think this is appropriate. cygwin-developers is for
>developers of cygwin1.dll. Last I heard, Linus has no input into what
>Redhat put into the (say) the RawHide distro, so why should the
>cygwin1.dll developers care what goes into 'cygwin the net
>distribution'.

Yep.

>I think we should either get a consensus from all the package
>maintainers, or perhaps, wait 3 days for objections. If no objections,
>then the package is allowed in. If there are objections, discuss until
>resolved. To prevent deadlock, a single individual objecting will not
>cause a package to be rejected, the objections must be agreed with by
>other package maintainers.

As long as I get veto power or whatever the opposite of veto power,
that's fine with me.  I'm not exactly Linus in this situation, I guess.

I'm not sure that we really need to be this formal, though.  Who's going
to be doing the tracking?

Once again, it sounds like another job for a script.  :-)

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/