Re: AdminCygwin Release

[Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please at cygwin dot com>]

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 11:21:47AM +0100, BGINFO4X wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 06:48:02PM +0100, BGINFO4X wrote:
>>>>>Hello everyone,
>>>>>
>>>>>I'm trying to create a "Small Admin Cywgin relase", called AdminCgwin.
>>>>>If it works, I will upload to sourceforge.
>>>>>
>>>>>These are the main lines:
>>>>>
>>>>>1- Create an installation windows package (.msi) with WIX.
>>>>>
>>>>>2- Default Installed packages: base + admin + apt-cyg.
>>>>>The remaining packages should be installed via apt-cyg
>>>>
>>>> Remember that you have to host all of the source code as well as the
>>>> binaries.
>>>
>>>Why do I neeed to host all the source code?  the sources are not
>>>necessary to produce my binaries ... I don't compile any ...
>>
>> Because that is how the GPL works.  If you provide binaries, you
>> provide sources.  This is basic stuff that you should know if you
>> are planning a forked Cygwin release or any sort of distribution
>> of open source binaries.
>
>Ok.
>
>"To the setup maintainers": it would be nice add "src" option on
>setup.exe, to get the source code of package with the command line.

Huh?  There is a source option in setup.exe.

>>>> I think it's more problem
>>>
>>>I see it as a "bash package" ready to be used by Win Admins ...
>>>
>>>than it is worth and is likely to cause
>>>> confusion within the Cygwin community.
>>>
>>>I don't see that point of view: This is not a fork of cygwin, only is
>>>a "Windows package of cygwin". It is "pure" cygwin.
>>
>> You're taking our packages, doing something with them and making them
>> available on another site.  i.e., you're forking our release.
>
>Ok. Thanks for your appointment.
>
>> You're actually treading on thin ice here since you are trying to get
>> help for a release that is not the subject of this mailing list.  That
>> makes this whole discussion pretty much off-topic.
>
>Yes, I'm sorry. I will move the discussion to cygwin-talk list if you
>don't mind.

Actually, I do mind.  The cygwin-talk list isn't intended to be a forum
to discuss other cygwin releases.

>> And that's another issue.  We definitely will not be providing support
>> for anyone who wanders in here looking for help with problems they
>> encounter with your packages.
>
>I TOTALLY agree with this.

You may agree with this but that won't stop people from being confused.

I still think this is a bad idea.  I know what you're trying to do.  You
are basically trying to provide a solution using tools that you more or
less understand rather than trying to work within the existing
(admittedly crude) release structure to provide benefit to everyone who
uses Cygwin.

We sometimes get people here who think they have to fork Cygwin because
they understand some subset of something on their own and don't or can't
grok the big picture well enough to try to make changes within the
release.  There is that + the need some people have of being a
recognized "Project lead".  Believe me, the glory in that title cannot
be underestimated.  It's a heady experience.

cgf

--
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