Mail Archives: cygwin-apps/2001/12/20/14:29:16
On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 02:09:17PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 07:38:39AM -0500, Earnie Boyd wrote:
> >Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >> Not amused,
> >> Corinna
> >
> >Nor, am I amused. If it must be tagged I'd rather see the tag NEW
> >instead, unless the maintainer believes that it's actually an
> >experimental version.
>
> I think I've already given my opinion on this, too. I don't see any
> reason for a new package to be marked "Test". What's the gain? It
> will just result in the package getting almost no exposure.
>
> What extra information will be gained by making it "Test"? Will the
> new user be more forgiving? More apt to report bugs? I don't get
> it.
>
> I thought the intent of Test was to have a version of a product for
> people to try while still providing a safety net of a "stable" version
> to fall back to.
>
> I don't see how that applies to the first release of a new package.
So back to the original question:
John, are you sure that it should become a `test' version? Otherwise
I'll remove it.
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat, Inc.
- Raw text -