Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 17:49:09 +0200 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygapp Subject: Re: strange source packaging? Message-ID: <20020418174909.B24044@cygbert.vinschen.de> Mail-Followup-To: cygapp References: <20020417210033 DOT GB20207 AT redhat DOT com> <49269 DOT 66 DOT 32 DOT 89 DOT 136 DOT 1019089317 DOT squirrel AT secure2 DOT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20020418110943 DOT D24938 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <3CBEDBBA DOT 5040000 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20020418170631 DOT G29277 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <3CBEE9DA DOT 7050005 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3CBEE9DA.7050005@ece.gatech.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 11:44:26AM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote: > BUT...having said all of that, I reiterate: I prefer the style 3 over > EITHER style 1 or style 2 -- and the question here seems to be "document > styles 1,2,3, or document 1,(!2),3 or (!1),2,3 So I win, regardless. I > really don't have a horse in the 1,2 vs. 1,(!2) vs. (!1),2 race. So, > I've made my argument for 1,(!2) but won't defend it; I'll wait for a > consensus to emerge and will document the result. What about 1 and 2 being actually the same? Except for "it would be nice" to add a patch file? Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Developer mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat, Inc.