This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: attn: which, bzip2,gzip maintainers (was Re: some problems with setup.ini)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Faylor" <cgf@redhat.com>
> I think that gzip and bzip2 obviously belong in the same category.
Yes.
> gzip is already in Base. Probably bzip2 belongs there too. I think
Hmm, ok. Now, if I can just figure out why gzip is in base... coud it be
to manually extract tar.bz2 files? In which case, tar should be there
too.
> that both should also be in "Utils". Currently only bzip2 is in
Utils.
Fine by me.
> I don't think rxvt belongs in Base.
Neither do I. I think that shells is the most intuitive place for rxvt,
as looking for it under X11 would surely confuse someone.
> >Wasn't ``someone'' going to move around several packages? Do the
> >maintainers have to do this themselves, or can the hand of fate push
> >around package categories?
When the hand of fate pushes, it has to answer to the maintainers. Or
more to the point, I do not want to get into the habit of solving
maintainers issues for them, as that won't scale when there are lots of
packages. I'm pretty sure Chris feels the same way.
> I have no problem with maintainers moving their packages into another
> category unless someone wants to do something nonsensical like move
> bash into "compression utilities" or something.
Well, given that someone wrote an assembler in bash, perhaps bash
*should* be in development :].
Rob