[HEADSUP] Let's start a Cygwin 1.7 release area

[Brian Dessent]

Christopher Faylor wrote:

> Yes, I know.  I just don't think it clarifies anything to put a "Red
> Hat" in the registry.

I was thinking "Cygwin" would be better as well, but since it is
supposed to be a two-level heirarchy how about
"HK{LM,CU}\Software\Cygwin Project\Cygwin".  It has always seemed to me
that we actively try to de-emphasize any association that Red Hat has in
the actual day-to-day operation of the project, other than owning the
copyrights and having their own commercial fork.  Likewise with the
"Company ID" in the resource strings for cygwin1.dll, listing Red Hat
always seemed a bit off to me, but I recognise that if we have to list a
real company that Red Hat is the obvious choice.

Brian