This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: new release of Pine
Eduardo Chappa wrote:
*** Charles Wilson (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote today:
:) A few important points:
:) 1) Yes, Eduardo Chappa IS the official cygwin maintainer of pine --
:) At least, he was the guy who announce pine on cygwin-announce:
:) 2) /usr/doc/Cygwin/pine*.README doesn't say that Eduardo is the
:) 3) it should.
Thanks Charles for your comments. I decided not to write my name in the
readme file for personal reasons, it was a concious decision, and I see no
reason to add it. Several packages do not have it included in their
readme files, so I hope that you are not just being picky with my package
No, it's just this: since I didn't recall your name, I wondered if
someone was "hijacking" the package. I vaguely remember somebody rather
petulantly asking for LDAP support, and was given a "when the maintainer
is ready" brushoff (I may be misremembering here -- I'm just explaining
what was going on in *my* head).
So, then up pops some guy named "Eduardo" with an LDAP pine update.
A quick check in /usr/doc/Cygwin/pine*.README to see if this "Eduardo"
guy is the actual maintainer, or the petulant guy trying to pull a fast
Hmmm.... maintainer not listed...
Okay, now I'm REALLY curious. Go to the cygwin-announce archives, and
see who posted the announcement.
April? AHA! Yep, Eduardo is the maintainer
Basically, an unecessary PITA -- because your name wasn't in the README.
And all I was doing was trying to ensure that the "real" maintainer's
interests weren't slighted.
I read e-mail in both the cygwin and cygwin-apps lists and am aware of any
requests, bug reports, people have sent, so I see no reason why people
need to know who is in charge of maintaining it, when sending e-mail to
the list works just fine.
Well, I guess cgf keeps a list somewhere of who maintains what...
This is certainly not a policy listed in the page that describes how to
make a package for cygwin, so I would like, as others have been in the
past, be excused to add that line, and would appreciate if others did not
add it for me.
Nobody is going to touch your package(s). In fact, it was precisely to
insure that the pine package was NOT messed with without the official
maintainer's (your) approval, that led to my message in the first place!
Would it be possible that someone uploaded this new version?, if not, just
let me know. People will be using the first version, and that's fine with
I can't do it (easily) -- I'm on a modem these days. :-( Sorry.