Question about old win32 api

[Michael Enright]

On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 5:50 PM, Vince Rice  wrote:

>blindly

The blindness was blindness to the fact that new users were getting a
different version than existing users in some way other than fixing
vulns. Since Cygwin isn't the sort of product that needs to make up
sham reasons to upgrade as Microsoft Word does ("Look! A Ribbon!"),
one assumes that constant incorporation of upstreams, constantly
switching away from unmaintained upstreams to maintained-but-different
upstreams etc is what the Cygwin user base wants. Or at least most of
it.

Do Cygwin'ers ever debate or think about an LTS track for Cygwin? Is
that why there's a "time machine?"

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple