Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From: "Hans Horn" <hannes AT 2horns DOT com>
Subject:  Re: maintaining bash
Date:  Thu, 7 Apr 2005 17:10:14 -0700
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <d34i0v$hdk$1@sea.gmane.org>
References:  <423AE723 DOT 3090801 AT buddydog DOT org> <6 DOT 1 DOT 2 DOT 0 DOT 0 DOT 20050318073557 DOT 01f85cc0 AT imap DOT myrealbox DOT com> <d348aa$6r6$1 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org> <4255B3C7 DOT 9030306 AT buddydog DOT org> <4255B8AC DOT 2C88CDE6 AT dessent DOT net>
X-Complaints-To: usenet AT sea DOT gmane DOT org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: p1.almaden.ibm.com
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2527
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-IsSubscribed: yes

Nevermind! Sorry, folks - I really didn't mean to upset anybody! Bye then!
H.

Brian Dessent wrote:
> Jonathan Arnold wrote:
>
>> Hans Horn wrote:
>>> Oops - didn't see this one! Just posted offer as bash voluteer
>>> myself!
>>> Was looking for bash 3.0 in the archives.
>>> If  Jonathan still wants to maintain bash 3.0, of course, I will
>>> withdraw my offer.
>>
>> Yeah, sorry, I just haven't been able to get to it - crunch time
>> here at work.  If you want to give it a whirl, feel free, Hans.
>
> Just so everyone is clear here... The current bash maintainer is
> Ronald Landheer-Cieslak, who was still around and answering bash
> questions as of Feb:
> <http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2005-02/msg00263.html>.  He has said
> repeatedly that he has been busy and without access to a windows
> machine, which is probably why there have been few bash updates.  On
> the other hand, he has also said nothing to indicate that he does not
> wish to continue maintaining bash.  Furthermore, threads in the past
> have expressed the fact that 2.05b has been very stable and both
> Ronald and others have agreed that any major changes in bash would
> have to be done very carefully so as not to cause instability.
>
> I have CC:d this to the cygwin-apps list which is where discussion of
> packaging should take place.
>
> Brian





--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/