Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2003 18:45:44 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: So, *should* I go back to distributing the mingw/w32api sources in the cygwin source tarball?
Message-ID: <20030208234544.GH9272@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
References: <20030208171602 DOT GD9272 AT redhat DOT com> <Pine DOT GSO DOT 4 DOT 44 DOT 0302081246340 DOT 12312-100000 AT slinky DOT cs DOT nyu DOT edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0302081246340.12312-100000@slinky.cs.nyu.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i

On Sat, Feb 08, 2003 at 12:55:26PM -0500, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>[*] It can be derived from the combination of the ChangeLog and the
>cygwin-cvs archives, of course, but that's cumbersome.  Could you include
>the exact time in the ChangeLog entries dealing with bumping DLL version
>numbers?

That goes against ChangeLog conventions.

However, none of this will work anyway for those rare times when I make
changes on the branch and release a 1.3.20-2 or something.  So, nevermind.

cgf