Questions and a RFC [was Re: Assignment from Nicholas Wourms arrived]

Nicholas Wourms
Wed Aug 13 14:09:00 GMT 2003 wrote:
> Nicholas Wourms wrote:
>> Planning ahead for future possibilities is always a good thing, so in 
>> that respect this seems like a sound idea.  Since we are already 
>> dealing with ABI breakage, I thought I'd float this now to see what 
>> people think.  Would a change like this be of benefit to Cygwin?
> Hell no.  I am irrevocably and unalterably opposed to implementing this 
> change before 1.5.2 goes gold.
> We've already had THREE ABI breakages in the last month.  Now, you want 
> to add another one -- to avoid one in the future.
> Here's an idea:  lets wait until the NEXT scheduled ABI breakage to do 
> yours; then we'll get two for the price of one.
> Right now, cygwin-1.5.x is overdue by several months.  It NEEDS to go 
> out the door; we can continually add more ABI breakages forever and 
> never release a new version...but that's rather silly IMO.

That's perfectly fine with me, you point is well made.


More information about the Cygwin-patches mailing list