X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:message-id:from:reply-to:to:subject
	:references:in-reply-to:content-type; q=dns; s=default; b=Fq/Jny
	/oKKuulIqr18HSOCo60Voa324ao4QXkWyUxWFqkiwsNtfmAO6Ae+rwQOrv2VoJdP
	MJk25RMFvN/ntgpCwnQ9YXQ+nitvijKHEhj21ro3u18vqiQNER+TUsauX7dCuVO0
	7SZPQXrtDh9RJrNL4cyWCERv+zrtZXyWV2FyE=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:message-id:from:reply-to:to:subject
	:references:in-reply-to:content-type; s=default; bh=tstyqmRpfa9A
	bF5PqGEjuDInR+M=; b=ByhpMeOCciBYPLMUVDsT99aa1FOPW3tHRthdGYMSkw7v
	grDZjmkwLkg2ibEIPBuJX0gW5arwdKtUKDrdeH22rvKWyHd1E+aMOFl2vezUOFH4
	YX4amZfOvETxKYWy+Wo5c3wWwI82SFdACjDf3WGPFlTcWHBg2qk7GChqvugb6EQ=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
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
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_NUMSUBJECT,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=H*MI:sk:2018090, H*M:smtp, H*f:sk:2018090, Nobody
X-HELO: lb3-smtp-cloud8.xs4all.net
Date: Sat, 01 Sep 2018 20:08:36 +0200
Message-ID: <7684973a80c95141a3b4194aaf33c70b@smtp-cloud8.xs4all.net>
From: Houder <houder AT xs4all DOT nl>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Bug Report: Regression in Cygwin 2.11.0-1
References: <BL2PR16MB096125DC7F302700C5DE88C0C80E0 AT BL2PR16MB0961 DOT namprd16 DOT prod DOT outlook DOT com> <pmdgjr$9q9$1 AT blaine DOT gmane DOT org> <20180901155435 DOT GL6350 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
In-Reply-to: <20180901155435.GL6350@calimero.vinschen.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=fixed
User-Agent: mua.awk 0.99

On Sat, 1 Sep 2018 17:54:35, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> I'll fix this and release a 2.11.1 soon, but I still have a question:
> 
> Why do I push out test releases if nobody cares?

Yes, I know, it is a _hypothetical_question_. You do not really expect
an answer.

However it was my thought exactly. Nobody? I like to think that those
that were responsible for patches, have tested their modifications.

I did.

On the other hand, those that will find problems, the people building
packages, will only do that on "official" releases.

I am almost sure of that :-)

Unless you like creating test releases, releasing only one before you
push an "official" one, would be more efficient, I imagine.

Yes, you would run the chance that you would have to mend an official
release several times ... but is that bad?

Just a thought.

Henri


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