This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Request for a version/ revision/ release number for the whole Cygwin release/ distribution
- From: Joshua Daniel Franklin <joshuadfranklin at gmail dot com>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com, dpchrist at holgerdanske dot com
- Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 21:00:37 -0700
- Subject: Re: Request for a version/ revision/ release number for the whole Cygwin release/ distribution
- References: <200410010531.i915VL1a014777@a.mail.sonic.net>
- Reply-to: Joshua Daniel Franklin <joshuadfranklin at gmail dot com>
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
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
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