"submission rules page" proposal number 2

Christopher Faylor cgf-no-personal-reply-please@cygwin.com
Fri Jan 6 01:52:00 GMT 2006

On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 02:26:29AM +0100, Lapo Luchini wrote:
>Eric Blake wrote:
>> You may want to move step 4 prior to step 1, since you mention submitting
>> the proposed setup.hint online.
>Mhhh... that's a tough issue: for sure step 1 has a forward reference to
>step 4 regarding setup.hint (which is bad), but step 1 contains the most
>important info, and putting it at step 2 after a longish text about the
>Test-ness of packages seems to remove step 1 quite a bit of authority.
>Uhm. Any other comment or suggestion how to solve the issue?
>> Also, in the email, it is helpful if
>> you explicitly state which older versions to keep or delete from the
>> mirrors.
>Can "old" version be multiple or just a single one? (I'm assuming the
>latter, in version 2 I'm preparing right now)
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> Yep.  We increased the votes when we allowed packages that were already
>> in other distributions to slide in.
>Whoops, didn't remember that.
>> I've been meaning to mention this.  The disk space limitations on the new
>> sourceware are pretty much nonexistent now - at least for a year or so.
>> I don't think there's any harm in keeping old versions around now unless
>> people think this is a bad idea in general.
>Should I remove that part, then?

I'd like to hear what other people (particularly Corinna) think before we
remove the section.

>> should be sent as soon as possible after
>> the uploaded message has been sent to cygwin-apps.
>Does the old-times rule "give a few hours to allow the package spread to
>the mirrors" hold no more, then?

I don't see any reason to wait.  The more you wait, the more you stand the
chance of forgetting.


More information about the Cygwin-apps mailing list