This is the mail archive of the cygwin-xfree mailing list for the Cygwin XFree86 project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Consensus about man and doc X11 directory structure


Charles Wilson wrote:
Yaakov S (Cygwin Ports) wrote:
[...]
What's stopping us from moving the Win32 tcltk in /opt/win32, and making
new *NIX tcl and tk packages in /usr?  Then all that's necessary for
insight is to add /opt/win32 to PATH (either through a script,
profile.d, or manually).  Similar packages (i.e. that have both X11/*NIX
and Win32 flavors) could use /opt/win32 as well.


All of this mucking about with tk and insight requires the concurrence of -- and oodles of extra work by -- the tk maintainer and the insight maintainer. Plus, <speculation alert> given the centrality of the debugger to the GNUPro product, this sort of change might meet resistance from the PowersThatBe channeled thru our local Benign Dictator(s).

Umm... reality check:


1) How many of our BDs actually work for Red Hat anymore?

2) Is GNUPro even a product anymore? The only date I could find related to the product mentioned "GNUPro 2001":

http://www.redhat.com/software/gnupro/technical/gnupro_gdb.html

3) If Red Hat isn't updating any product that uses Cygwin to provide a product on Windows, then why are we holding onto this idea that we must continue to support something that was once sold?

4) If Red Hat is updating GNUPro, but doing a piss-poor job of telling people about it, then what are we? Red Hat's underground GNUPro development team?


Look, it has been made quite clear to us on several occasions that Red Hat doesn't pay for anyone in their company to do development on Cygwin, so I say, "Who is Red Hat?". Why do they matter if they aren't contributing to the project and are either holding us hostage to supporting some long-gone product or secretly using our efforts to sell a couple million a year of some product that uses our work?


Why do we kowtow to Red Hat when they appear to have abandoned the project, except possibly for some sales that benefit only them?

This just doesn't make any sense to me.

How many people feel the same way when this argument about supporting Insight via Win32 Tk comes up?

I don't mean to be insulting and I'm not implying that I would do anything to overturn or route-around these decisions (since I really don't care about Tk and haven't got the time for a fight), but I would just like to know how Red Hat gets to make decisions in this community that seems to get very little investment from them.

Harold

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


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]