Request for a version/ revision/ release number for the whole Cygwin release/ distribution

[Karl M]

Hi All...

What about calling it B21? ":>
                                     "
...


>From: Joshua Daniel Franklin <joshuadfranklin@gmail.com>
>Reply-To: Joshua Daniel Franklin <joshuadfranklin@gmail.com>
>To: cygwin@cygwin.com, dpchrist@holgerdanske.com
>Subject: Re: Request for a version/ revision/ release number for the whole 
>Cygwin release/ distribution
>Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 21:00:37 -0700
>
>On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 22:31:26 -0700, David Christensen wrote:
> > Per the Cygwin FAQ (http://cygwin.com/faq.html):
> >
> >         "If you are looking for the version number for the whole Cygwin
> > release, there is none. Each package in the Cygwin release has its own
> > version. The packages in Cygwin are continually improving, thanks to the
> > efforts of net volunteers who maintain the Cygwin binary ports. Each
> > package has its own version numbers and its own release process. "
> >
> > I would especially like to request that there be a "stable" 
>distribution.
>
>As the person who wrote those FAQ words (with input from several people 
>here),
>I'd like to go on the record as saying that a stable distribution is a
>great idea.
>
>I *really* don't have time to work on it (heck, I don't even have time
>to be writing
>this email), but that doesn't matter, because there's nothing to stop it 
>from
>happening. Simply start with a snapshot of the current release tree. Make 
>some
>sort of ISO available or something, and think up a name other to call
>it than just
>"Cygwin" (like, I don't know "Yggdrasil StableCygwin 1.0" or "Roman 
>Catholic
>StableCygwin 1.0"--I highly recommend using some unique word for Internet
>searching). Whenever you find a problem with a particular package in your
>stable release (i.e., rsync EOL) patch your source version, replace the 
>binary
>package, and make a new ISO.
>
>Here's the catch: IFF you gradually find that there is a lot of
>patching necessary, it
>will become unmanagable. You can also simply forget about meeting
>feature requests,
>because I that there will be too many. People who want features should
>roll their own, or
>use the Cygwin Net Release.
>
>On the other hand, if it's a success, you can write a guide to what
>you did and/or
>do regular releases, like Red Hat does. If that starts happening, get
>back to us and
>I guarantee that you will find people more interested. Well, I guess I
>can only guarantee
>myself, but I think there are some very big advantages to a stable
>distribution and that
>it will pull people in. If it really does turn out to be easy to
>maintain, it might even make
>all us maintainers' lives easier. You could start your own mailing
>lists for people using
>your "John Kerry StableCygwin 1.0" and perhaps segment our traffic a 
>little.
>
>Also, just to wrap up, in case it wasn't already clear enough:
>
>None of us can and/or want to organize a stable release, or to change
>the way the Net Release works.
>
>--
>Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
>Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
>Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
>FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
>

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! 
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/