This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)
- From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2014 01:51:17 -0400
- Subject: Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <6CF2FC1279D0844C9357664DC5A08BA2464FF5 at MLBXV06 dot nih dot gov> <5F8AAC04F9616747BC4CC0E803D5907D0C8B85C2 at MLBXv04 dot nih dot gov> <20140408152118 dot GB4595 at ednor dot casa dot cgf dot cx> <5344236E dot 8020503 at aol dot com> <20140408164902 dot GD5812 at ednor dot casa dot cgf dot cx> <5F8AAC04F9616747BC4CC0E803D5907D0C8B89AF at MLBXv04 dot nih dot gov> <20140408181301 dot GD2731 at ednor dot casa dot cgf dot cx> <CAAXzdLUJaQ3ap06EPD51ua45d7vqmaPanCZRo9CZDPKmMfm5=w at mail dot gmail dot com> <20140409032833 dot GA2351 at ednor dot casa dot cgf dot cx> <CAAXzdLUk3L3zRcGoLmb=GM-rnF7K8Y=fqNA8n9gfgVhja5TL2Q at mail dot gmail dot com>
- Reply-to: cygwin at cygwin dot com
On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 12:04:09AM -0500, Steven Penny wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 10:28 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> Instructions on how to check out the source are available at the cygwin web
>> site, just like they are at every open source site. Go to the cygwin web
>> page and look to the left. You'll see "Contributing" and "Source in CVS".
>> Both lead you to instructions. "Contributing" is intended to help with
>> providing patches. "Source in CVS" is obvious.
>I dont think you "get" my and perhaps other people's workflow. It goes
I replied directly to your observation that you couldn't find the Cygwin
source control information by pointing you at the places you apparently
missed on the Cygwin web page. So I'm pretty sure that I got it. I
checked your message multiple times to make sure that I didn't miss a
reference to the places on the web page which talk about the CVS
So, if you think that I missed your point then I don't think you stated
>1. discover something that isnt working
>2. go to web repo
Which is referenced in the link I provided.
>3. search existing issues
That would be the mailing list archives (as advertised) but also, see below.
>4. search current codebase, online, to find offending file/line
That would be the "web repo", assuming you are using terminology correctly.
>5. if it looks like something I can fix then clone/checkout
Instructions for which are in the link I provided.
>Notice a checkout is not even done until step 5, with steps 1-4 all
>being done through web interface. This is important. Your users
>(read: potential devs) should not have to do a clone just to see the
>problem in the code.
You don't seem to have gotten the fact that I pointed you at a page
which had a pointer to the web repo (which you puzzlingly had already
found). Also, you probably should try to use correct terminology if you
are trying to make a point. CVS doesn't "clone".
Except for the lack of an advertised bugzilla link at the Cygwin web
page, Cygwin is like every one of the other projects hosted at
sourceware.org/gcc.gnu.org. This includes thriving projects like gcc,
binutils, gdb, and others. All of the developers in those projects were
able to figure out how to find CVS (svn, git) web information and,
eventually, check out their stuff.
Cygwin is a thriving project but only because we have lots of package
maintainers and two dedicated DLL maintainers. It's thriving because we
have a lot of users. We don't, unlike gcc, gdb, binutils, or newlib
have a lot of developers. That is likely because the Windows nature of
the project means that we get a different class of users than, e.g.,
gcc. It's not because it so amazingly difficult to navigate
http://cygwin.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/winsup/?cvsroot=src or check
Cygwin does differ from the abovementioned projects in that it has a lot
more content available to attempt to explain things like mailing lists
and installation. That is, again, because it seems like we don't
attract a highly technical audience who can figure this out without a
Corinna (a Red Hat employee) and I are both involved in open source
projects. I know (I wouldn't speak for Corinna) how laughable (I use
that term because you obviously like frankness) it is to say that it's
hard to get to the source control. It simply isn't true. We use the
same model as lots of other open source sites. We are behind the times
because we haven't switched to git yet but, since we didn't have many
developers when git wasn't around, it's hard to see how git is the
Anway, we have been contemplating advertising Cygwin's bugzilla but
neither Corinna nor I are keen on policing what could degenerate into
scores of "Command not found" bug reports. If someone wants to
volunteer to be a bugzilla cop I'd love to deputize them.
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple