Re: maintaining bash

["Hans Horn" <hannes at 2horns dot com>]

Nevermind! Sorry, folks - I really didn't mean to upset anybody! Bye then!
H.

Brian Dessent wrote:
> Jonathan Arnold wrote:
>
>> Hans Horn wrote:
>>> Oops - didn't see this one! Just posted offer as bash voluteer
>>> myself!
>>> Was looking for bash 3.0 in the archives.
>>> If  Jonathan still wants to maintain bash 3.0, of course, I will
>>> withdraw my offer.
>>
>> Yeah, sorry, I just haven't been able to get to it - crunch time
>> here at work.  If you want to give it a whirl, feel free, Hans.
>
> Just so everyone is clear here... The current bash maintainer is
> Ronald Landheer-Cieslak, who was still around and answering bash
> questions as of Feb:
> <http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2005-02/msg00263.html>.  He has said
> repeatedly that he has been busy and without access to a windows
> machine, which is probably why there have been few bash updates.  On
> the other hand, he has also said nothing to indicate that he does not
> wish to continue maintaining bash.  Furthermore, threads in the past
> have expressed the fact that 2.05b has been very stable and both
> Ronald and others have agreed that any major changes in bash would
> have to be done very carefully so as not to cause instability.
>
> I have CC:d this to the cygwin-apps list which is where discussion of
> packaging should take place.
>
> Brian





--
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/