Re: new cygwin package: cgoban

[Charles Wilson <cwilson at ece dot gatech dot edu>]

Be sure to read the p.s. ...

Christopher Faylor wrote:

> On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 03:04:04PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
> 
>>Similarly, I don't like the restriction that all 'X'-based packages go 
>>under XFree86/ on sourceware.  We don't put inetutils underneath 
>>ncurses/.  We don't put openssh under openssl/.
>>
> 
> I wasn't really asking for debate.  You can feel free not to like it
> but that is the way I would like to see things organized.


Sorry, Chris, but it's my turn to get pissy.

Why?  You have never stated, not one time that I've seen, WHY you want 
to put all X-related stuff under a single tree.  As long as they are 
under release/, they're still going to show up in setup no matter where 
they are located, so setup's behavior can't have anything to do with it. 
  If it's a "cleanliness" issue (don't clutter the main release/ dir 
with all that "X junk") -- fine, SAY that.  At least it's a reason -- 
and a slightly better one than "because I said so".  And I've already 
heard the one about "because we're mean".

Further, if one accepts that there should be one tree for all X 
**clients**, you've never stated WHY that single tree must be the same 
one used by the XFree86 packages. They aren't PART of XFree86.  They 
just USE XFree86.  It's not that I merely 'don't like it' -- I think 
this second part is irredeemably dumb.  WHAT am I missing?  Please tell 
me; you normally don't make executive assertions without a reason, you 
don't normally do dumb things; yet you seem to be doing so now...which 
makes me think I am somehow missing the "obvious" reasoning behind your 
assertion.

This just makes zero sense to me:

release/package/
release/package/
release/XFree86/
release/XFree86/xfree86-base/
release/XFree86/xfree86-fonts/
release/XFree86/xfree86-.../
release/XFree86/i-happen-to-use-x-package1/
release/XFree86/i-happen-to-use-x-package2/
release/XFree86/i-happen-to-use-x-package3/
release/XFree86/i-happen-to-use-x-package4/
release/XFree86/i-happen-to-use-x-package5/
release/XFree86/i-happen-to-use-x-package6/
release/XFree86/i-happen-to-use-x-package7/
release/XFree86/i-happen-to-use-x-package8/

This makes (some) sense, from a 'keep-release/-clutter-to-a-minimum' 
perspective ...

release/package/
release/package/
release/XFree86/
release/XFree86/xfree86-base/
release/XFree86/xfree86-fonts/
release/XFree86/xfree86-.../
release/Xclients/i-happen-to-use-x-package1/
release/Xclients/i-happen-to-use-x-package2/
release/Xclients/i-happen-to-use-x-package3/
release/Xclients/i-happen-to-use-x-package4/
release/Xclients/i-happen-to-use-x-package5/
release/Xclients/i-happen-to-use-x-package6/
release/Xclients/i-happen-to-use-x-package7/
release/Xclients/i-happen-to-use-x-package8/

--Chuck

P.S. wait a minute; I thought of something.  Is this a prelude to "Any 
questions about packages that appear under /XFree86/ should be directed 
to the cygwin-xfree list?"  And you're afraid that splitting out the 
Xclients -- either into /release/ or into /release/Xclients/ -- would 
cloud that issue?