Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>, <http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
From: Chris Faylor <cgf AT cygnus DOT com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 22:49:01 -0500
To: Andrew Dalgleish <andrewd AT axonet DOT com DOT au>
Cc: cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Subject: Re: next net release preliminary info
Message-ID: <20000126224901.A1793@cygnus.com>
Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Dalgleish <andrewd AT axonet DOT com DOT au>,
	cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
References: <00F8D6E8AB0DD3118F1A006008186C9607C851 AT server1 DOT axonet DOT com DOT au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i
In-Reply-To: <00F8D6E8AB0DD3118F1A006008186C9607C851@server1.axonet.com.au>; from andrewd@axonet.com.au on Thu, Jan 27, 2000 at 02:45:46PM +1100

On Thu, Jan 27, 2000 at 02:45:46PM +1100, Andrew Dalgleish wrote:
>Just a thought...
>I like the way debian number their packages with the "upstream" version
>as the most significant, and the "debian" version as the least
>significant.
>This makes it easy to identify which upstream version you are using, and
>also allows for more than one package version.

That's not a bad idea.  Doesn't Red Hat do something similar?  I"m
embarassed to admit that I don't know.

>One question:
>For packages like the GNU fileutils etc, will the source tarballs
>include the original source + patches (similar to debian) or pre-patched
>source files?
>
>I prefer the former because:
>Pros:
>* A stand-alone patch helps document what had to change to make the
>package work under cygwin.
>* A patch for version X will often (?) work for version X+1.
>* One package maintainer computes the diff vs many package downloaders
>doing it, perhaps incorrectly.
>
>Cons:
>* Harder to build. (And hence more noise on the list)
>* More work for the package maintainer. (Hmm, not good... :-)

Hmm.  I like the idea but the "Cons" scare me.

cgf