[rurban: Re: setup.exe command line parameters]
Tue Jun 24 15:16:00 GMT 2008
Brian Dessent wrote on 24 June 2008 15:55:
> But, alternatively, if we decide just to go with the release
> branch+verification backport I think we can bypass this and just go live
> now if you're confident enough about it. But when the idea of slipping
> in more and more things comes up I start to feel uneasy and want to go
> back to having a public RC to prevent egg on our face. Do you see the
> dilemma? I'd really rather not rush a release with a bunch of changes,
> so can we just push out the verification change only and then work on
> stabilizing HEAD and doing a RC without the time pressure?
A fair point, considering our resource limitations. Ok then: my first
order of business will be getting the verification release out the door.
This needs me to do two things: update the various docs that describe
setup.exe, and figure out how to do the code-signing bit. (Which probably
means us using a self-signed cert to get started with, and seeing if we can
get a proper cert later... more on this when I've researched it a bit
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....
More information about the Cygwin-apps