This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: [HEADSUP] Let's start a Cygwin 1.7 release area
On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 11:07:26PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Apr 8 14:41, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 07:40:13PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> >On Apr 8 13:26, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> >> cygwin-xp? cygwin-2008?
>> >cysta? :)
>> >cygwin-2008 isn't bad, though.
>> >> cygwin-nextgen?
>> >Or just cygwin-new, maybe. I'd take any of them, -new or -2008.
>> In my experience, adding a "new" to any directory or file is a
>> guaranteed way of ensuring that the name will not always be accurate.
>Why, we could always name the next versions "cygwin-newer",
>"cygwin-evenmorenew", "cygwin-newerthannew" and
>> How about cygwinng?
>With a dash? cygwin-ng? Like syslog-ng. I was going to suggest this
>too, but I didn't want to copy the naming too bluntly.
We actually use "ng" internally to Netapp. I actually wanted to call my
project either "ds9" or "voyager" but I got vetoed.
>I guess we should use "cygwin-notasnewbutstillnewenough". I'm still
>more leaning towards cygwin-2008. You shouldn't have suggested the
>name. It's all your fault.
I hate the name! Hate it!
But I don't really care. cygwin-2008 is fine with me. However, I
predict that cgf-2012 will probably be grumbling about that name