Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID: <E94FF01DFF6CD31186F4080009DC361501C781BF@nttwr2.tower.bldgs.butlermfg.org>
From: "Parker, Ron" <rdparker AT butlermfg DOT com>
To: cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Subject: RE: for interest: cygwin rpm on sourceforge
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 11:20:45 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Charles Wilson [mailto:cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu]

<snip>

> This whole deal smacks of pure stubborn-ness.  "I don't like the
> official installation method (even though it was the subject of months
> of debate) so I'm gonna muddy the waters with an rpm distro"  "Even
> though I'm maintaining an rpm of bind for cygwin, I will not 
> contribute
> a binary .tar.gz so that users of the official installation method can
> benefit..."

I just hope it doesn't degrade into the GNU-emacs vs. XEmacs frackas, where
there are actually two very good and very similar packages with one freely
using code from the other, but donating none back to the original.  (This is
not a commentary on XEmacs, I actually use both.)