Pending Packages List, 2003-10-24 [tcm]

[Charles Wilson]

Harold L Hunt II wrote:

> The problem I see with even having /usr/X11R6/doc/Cygwin and 
> /usr/X11R6/share/doc/Cygwin/ is that we will continue to have 
> discussions about whether to classify a package and/or its readme as an 
> XFree86 or non-XFree86 package.
> 
> Perhaps we should entertain the idea of dropping /usr/X11R6/doc/Cygwin 
> and /usr/X11R6/share/doc/Cygwin in favor of /usr/share/doc/Cygwin?
> 
> Then we wouldn't have to ponder about whether linking to/depending 
> on/uses X means that the docs have to go in one place or another.

I don't have a strong opinion either way.  The only thing that bothers 
me is IF we at some point get TWO different (and incompatible) versions 
of the same package.   E.g. if somebody ever creates an X-based tcltk 
package.  Or if somebody creates a set of MSWindowing gtk+ packages -- 
and a set of X-based gtk+ packages.

But maybe that's just borrowing trouble.  I've been worrying about it 
for three years now and it hasn't happened...

> Maybe it is also time that we clarify what goes in the XFree86 category 
> and what goes elsewhere.  I always feel like I have sort of a way to 
> sneak packages in "under the radar" in my XFree86 category... but it 
> doesn't feel right for me to do this.  I should be having my packages 
> reviewed like others do (even if I post them myself).  It would thus 
> make sense to clarify what should go in XFree86, what I can post without 
> comment, and where everything else should go as well as the fact that it 
> must be reviewed by other developers.

if cygcheck foo.exe gives "cygX11-6.dll" -- then it should go into 
/usr/X11R6.  End of story. :-)

--
Chuck