This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: [HEADSUP] Let's start a Cygwin 1.7 release area
On Apr 15 10:17, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 11:08:49AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >Having said that, should we really rename the registry keys, what do we
> >do with the "Program Options" and the two "heap_foo" values?
>
> I'd like to keep the "Program Options" and nuke the "heap_foo" options.
Maybe you can get rid of heap_chunk_in_mb but it's still not clear that
we can get rid of heap_slop_in_mb. The strange allocation in 2003 and
later is a problem and just because we had nobody complaining for a
while doesn't mean the current slop value is always sufficient. I'm for
keeping this option.
> I also object to using "Red Hat" as the "owner" [...]
Red Hat *is* the owner of the code, regardless of the registry key you
want to use. I know that you have mixed feelings about Red Hat,
however, assuming the code is owned by the FSF, would you object against
a parent key name of FSF as well?
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat