This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-developers
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: 1.7.1 release date?
- From: Brendan Conoboy <blc at redhat dot com>
- To: cygwin-developers at cygwin dot com
- Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2009 16:08:25 -0700
- Subject: Re: 1.7.1 release date?
Dave Korn wrote:
> How does it know /which/ setup.ini file to download if you don't have
> two separate versions?
I believe all Corinna meant is that if the ini filenames remain the
same, new executables don't need to be generated to accommodate renaming
the directories (release->release-legacy, release-2->release).
Personally, I think renaming release-2 to release is asking for months
of "why did my X break?" type messages. IMO, it's better to break
updates such that people come looking for a new setup.exe than to break
somebody's working installation. That's why renaming setup-2.ini to
setup.ini could be a real problem- an unwitting major upgrade.
Since you're already on the verge of a great release that will require
some site changes, why not take full advantage? Why not come up with a
codename that represents all the new 1.7 functionality and use that for
a directory name? The OpenWRT project, for instance, is doing
development on 'kamikaze' while 'whiterussian' is the previous major
release milestone. If people have ever wanted to alter how Cygwin
development and releases work, like a stable-vs-devel system,
implementing that as part of the rename seems like the right time to do it.
My interest? I mirror the Cygwin repo for Red Hat's internal purposes.
If you do the rename I'll need to update a few scripts. That's not a
big deal. As a long-time release engineer, however, the idea of the
rename gives me pause. It reminds me of all the "minor" changes I've
done thinking it wouldn't be a big deal, only to find out new an
unanticipated ways in which I had broken things.
Good luck ya'all, 1.7 is awesome.
--
Brendan Conoboy / Red Hat, Inc. / blc@redhat.com