nuke cygwin legacy?

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 09:04:59PM +0100, Thomas Wolff wrote:
>Am 06.02.2013 03:21, schrieb Yaakov (Cygwin/X):
>> On Tue, 05 Feb 2013 20:56:42 +0100, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
>>> It doesn't matter that it is not secure.
>> Yes, it does.  IMHO it is irresponsible on our part to distribute
>> unmaintained or knowingly vulnerable software, and it reflects badly on
>> the Cygwin project.
>>
>>
>> Yaakov
>Just a proposal (without advocating further) to avoid the problem of 
>providing insecure software for current systems:
>What about modifying setup.exe so that 1.5 can be installed *only* on 
>legacy systems?

I think the bike shed should be green.

The whole point of this discussion was that we didn't want to support
legacy in setup.exe anymore.  So far there have been two suggestions
that we should modify setup.exe to accommodate legacy.  That's not
really helpful.

I'm sorry that I put this to a vote.  cygwin-legacy has been removed
from the release area but not from the web page.

So, we'll see if someone contacts the cygwin mailing list with a valid,
non-speculative concern.  Given that there were only 14 attempts to
download last year, I doubt that there will be a huge outcry.

cgf