Re: 1.7.1 release date?

[Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com>]

Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 06:04:01PM +0000, Dave Korn wrote:
>> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>> Should we keep 1.5 docs available in a 1.5 subdir, for bad times?
>> Yes absolutely.  It's going to be in use for years, like 2-digit dates
>> and cobol and all those other things we thought would disappear long
>> ago(*).  (This is why I'd still like to update the old compiler one
>> last time, incidentally.)
> 
> It's your call but I think it is a very bad idea to be updating a
> relatively stable Cygwin release with new stuff just before bumping to a
> new version of Cygwin.

  Well, I've got it and it's basically ready to go, which was my main reason.
 But then I discovered it would need a binutils update to work properly.  I
now think it would still make some sense to upload it as a test/experimental
release, because that wouldn't destabilise anything and it would be
nice-to-have for those who are willing to build their own binutils from
source.  It just seems wasteful to throw it away when there are bound to be a
bunch of users who'd like to have it.

    cheers,
      DaveK