Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender:	cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Date:	Tue, 19 Mar 2002 10:20:40 -0500
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To:	cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Link for MORE
Message-ID:	<20020319152040.GE949@redhat.com>
Reply-To:	cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<20020319142909 DOT 38924 DOT qmail AT web20003 DOT mail DOT yahoo DOT com>
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<20020319142909.38924.qmail@web20003.mail.yahoo.com>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.3.23.1i

On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 06:29:09AM -0800, Joshua Daniel Franklin wrote:
>>I have no objection if the original contributors want to take the
>>cygutils source package, rip out everything that isn't (for instance)
>>'mkshortcut'-related, and release a standalone autotool'ed mkshortcut.
>>(However, I'm not pushing for that.)
>
>Personally, I feel a good test is whether it's something people are going
>to look for coming from another *NIX platform or not. There are people who are
>looking for the pager 'more' since that's what they used on SunOS 1.0 or 
>something. No one is going to be asking, "Why doesn't cygwin have 'mkshortcut' 
>or 'cygstart'!?!?" since they are cygwin-specific. (Not entirely true of, for
>example, unix2dos but close.)

Conversely, someone could ask "Why do I have to get mkshortcut when all that
I wanted was cygstart!?!?"

cgf

- Raw text -