This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the Cygwin 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: ImageMagick/Graphicsmagick wrote:

Again, you have not investigating the best solution here. You have
made up you mind based on just a few criteria and you are shoving it
down everyones throat. Given your strong statements and clear unwillingness
to discuss which project is best based on merit, don't bother replying.
I will not waste anymore of the CYGWIN community's time on a dead subject.
I will tell the CYGWIN community that ImageMagick Studio intends to have full support of ImageMagick 5.5.7 and 5.5.8 Beta for CYGWIN and both
source and binaries will be available on

I'm sorry but I don't like the potential ramifications if this were to happen. Not that I really have any say in the matter, I don't, but I feel that others out there share some of the concerns I will mention.

Harold, you've earned every right to make this decision as you see fit, and I respect that, but surely some sort of compromise can be reached which will satisfy both parties? The original author seems willing to work with your complaints if you are willing to keep an open mind.

However, the original author should realize that Harold has some valid points concerning the libtool versioning you used as well as hardcoding the version minors into the module directory paths. In effect, this means that we'd have to make a new runtime package each time the subminor was bumped PLUS keep the existing packages to maintain backward compatibility.

On the other hand, I've not looked at GraphicsMagick, do they use the same names for includes, include-dirs, modules, module-dirs, & libraries? If not, I can definitely see this as a PITA if you are building something which depends on the original names, since you'd have to tell it the new names and such. However, if it does use the same names, then inevitably there are going to be many who get confused and unintentionally (or perhaps intentionally) install both versions of the this software. When dll hell starts to set in, they probably aren't going to e-mail either of you personally, rather they are going to flood our already high-volume main list with false "bug" reports and what not. Plus, what if I or anyone else decide to package something which depends on the ImageMagick libraries? Then we'd have to tell people to make sure they uninstall the author's version to be able to use my package, even if they preferred the author's version. You can see where I'm going with this and the picture isn't pretty.


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