Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@sources.redhat.com Message-ID: <3BF44EFA.E5ABCA5B@wapme-systems.de> Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 00:25:46 +0100 From: Stipe Tolj Organization: Wapme Systems AG X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [de]C-CCK-MCD QXW0322b (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: de,en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Collins CC: Jan Nieuwenhuizen , Corinna Vinschen Subject: Re: no more package moratorium? References: <007f01c16cde$5016de20$0200a8c0@lifelesswks> <20011114124323.C24614@cygbert.vinschen.de> <3BF44A45.9DA8A866@wapme-systems.de> <06bc01c16e2a$a7061500$0200a8c0@lifelesswks> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > > > What about existing packages? Specifically, it would be grand if > > > tetex-beta would either get fixed or removed. > > > > IMO, any "released" tagged package should have it's maintainer, who > > decides and tracks done error and bugs. So in ER specification we have > > a [package] n <-> 1 [maintainer] relation. > > We have that, it's just recorded in the list archives :}. And hopefully > soon to be recorded in setup.hint. IMO this should not be recorded > separately from the package metadata (setup.hint). why? if the metadata is held in a database and all setup.hints are generated out of it we have no problems about consistence?! Stipe tolj@wapme-systems.de ------------------------------------------------------------------- Wapme Systems AG Münsterstr. 248 40470 Düsseldorf Tel: +49-211-74845-0 Fax: +49-211-74845-299 E-Mail: info@wapme-systems.de Internet: http://www.wapme-systems.de ------------------------------------------------------------------- wapme.net - wherever you are -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/