Updated: 1.7.0-34 (...and a plea)

Corinna Vinschen corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com
Mon Dec 8 18:15:00 GMT 2008

On Dec  8 13:00, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 08, 2008 at 06:16:15PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Dec  8 12:01, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >> On Fri, Dec 05, 2008 at 12:07:33PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >> >Btw., does anything speak against opening Cygwin up for public testing
> >> >on the Cygwin main list?
> >> 
> >> I think it is a good idea but I'd like to start tracking 1.7.x like a
> >> normal release and increasing the x with each new release.  That will
> >> allow us to figure out problems from source code more easily.
> >
> >I thought we stick to 1.7.0 until we create the first actual release in
> >which case we bump the version to 1.7.1.  After that we bump every time
> >again, as in earlier releases.
> Does it really matter?

Not in a technical sense.  It's just the idea that the first official
release shouldn't be 1.7.24.  1.7.1 sounds much more neat :)

> >Btw., when 1.7 is adopted, we will have to make release-2 an independent
> >directory again, right?  Otherwise we will still pull in new 1.5 packages
> >which will have inferior features.
> I think that when 1.7 is adopted
> release-2 -> release
> release -> release-deprecated
> and we make setup.exe changes to accommodate that.

I was just going to agree but ... does that work?  The idea is that
people still using an old setup will get the old release.  Since
"release" is fixed in old versions of setup, it might be more feasible
to stick to release-2 or to use something along the lines you suggested
at one point, like, say, "release-nt".


Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list