Message-Id: <200508080022.j780MF53017055@delorie.com> Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com From: "Herb Martin" To: Subject: RE: setup.exe filename Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2005 19:22:19 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <42F6A087.A111B257@dessent.net> > [mailto:cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com] On Behalf Of Brian Dessent > I do not like the idea of adding the version to the name of the file. > To a naive user it would reinforce the incorrect idea that > the version of setup has anything whatsoever to do with the > version of Cygwin and other packages that they are > installing. We already get too many of those on the mailing > list as it is. > > A user might see "setup-1.2.3" and then later see That is a logical and possibly sufficient reason for omitting the "version" from the CygWin setup file name. > As far as renaming it to something like "cygwin-setup.exe" or > "cygsetup.exe" or whatever, I'm neutral. I do think it's > unfortunate that it has always been named a generic word, but > I think changing it now would cause more confusion than good. Likely the "issue" is mostly for those who "just started" with CygWin -- those who have been around long enough to become accustomed to the file name probably understand how it does and does not work and one assumes that more people will adopt the system in the future than currently use it. (Not necessarily the same as "have ever used it.") -- Herb Martin -- 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/