Linux distro qualification clarification

Christopher Faylor
Fri Nov 4 14:42:00 GMT 2005

On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 11:53:44AM +0100, Dr. Volker Zell wrote:
>>>>>> Christopher Faylor writes:
>    > Btw, as long as we're talking about this, I think we need to clarify the
>    > rules a little.  I don't think that existence of a package in an
>    > experimental category in Debian or any other distribution should make it
>    > an automatic candidate for inclusion in Cygwin.
>    > I might even go so far as to say that Debian unstable doesn't qualify
>    > but I could be dissuaded from that view.
>    > This doesn't pertain to this thread that I've hijacked but I keep
>    > meaning to make this point.  Seeing the URLs above reminded me to
>    > do so.
>I understand your objections. But gnubg (backgammon) actually works
>quite well although it's still marked as alpha. I'm playing it almost
>every day. And after all it's just a game. I remember Corinna wanted at
>one time some more games in the distro.

"This doesn't pertain to this thread" == "I wasn't talking about gnubg".

That's why I changed the subject.


More information about the Cygwin-apps mailing list