Re: Changing cygwin-developers "charter"?

[Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd at yahoo dot com>]

--- Eric Christopher <echristo@cygnus.com> wrote:
> 
> > Personally, I am happy with the status quo here but I was wondering
> > if anyone else felt that we should open this up for discussions of
> > things like bfd/binutils/gcc, etc.
> > 
> 
> I wouldn't mind it being a discussion list for people developing ports
> for cygwin.  More of a people developing the cygwin env. as opposed to
> people developing with cygwin.  Make sense?
> 

The reason cygwin-developers exists was to help focus the discussion to the
Cygwin POSIX library only and the libraries needed to support it.  I don't
really think that this should change.

Perhaps a cygwin-packages would be more beneficial for the porting of tools
discussions between maintainers of packages.  I would think that this would
require some formal method of "this person is maintaining the cygwin port for
this package" database and all modifications would then be approved by that
maintainer.

BTW: I don't think that discussions of a netrelease should be considered
off-topic for cygwin-developers until cygwin-packages is created; but,
afterward that discussion should happen there.


=====
---
   Earnie Boyd: <mailto:earnie_boyd@yahoo.com>
            __Cygwin: POSIX on Windows__
Cygwin Newbies: <http://www.freeyellow.com/members5/gw32/index.html>
           __Minimalist GNU for Windows__
  Mingw32 List: <http://www.egroups.com/group/mingw32/>
    Mingw Home: <http://www.mingw.org/>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com