[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [3rd attempt] patches for cvs on cygwin

From: Charles Wilson
Subject: Re: [3rd attempt] patches for cvs on cygwin
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 12:06:22 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2

Larry Jones wrote:

Charles Wilson writes:

Is anybody listening?  Is this the correct list for patches?

Yes, it's the correct list.  Have you read what it says in HACKING?

Yes. "Is this the correct list?" was rhetorical. Did you read my original message?

This patch has been in use for over 18 months by 2000+ cygwin users.

Submitting a patch to bug-cvs is the way to reach the people who have
signed up to receive such submissions (including CVS developers), but
there may or may not be much (or any) response.  If you want to pursue
the matter further, you are probably best off working with the larger
CVS community.  Distribute your patch as widely as desired (mailing
lists, newsgroups, web sites, whatever).  Write a web page or other
information describing what the patch is for.

I did this over two years ago, but the web page is slightly out of date now.

It is neither practical
nor desirable for all/most contributions to be distributed through the
"official" (whatever that means) mechanisms of CVS releases and CVS
developers.  Now, the "official" mechanisms do try to incorporate
those patches which seem most suitable for widespread usage, together
with test cases and documentation.  So if a patch becomes sufficiently
popular in the CVS community, it is likely that one of the CVS
developers will eventually try to do something with it.  But dealing
with the CVS developers may be the last step of the process rather
than the first.

this read as boilerplate to me. Upon re-reading it, and your message, and observing the month-long silence on the list, it appears that is not boilerplate. It's an excuse.

The "CVS developers" are a small group of volunteers who have real jobs
and lives -- they only do CVS in their spare time which, as I'm sure you
know, is not nearly as copious as we'd like.

Yes -- but the number of "real" messages on the CVS mailing list is less than 15 per month. I note that RMS got a reply within minutes -- but then, he's RMS. :-)

Point: it doesn't take long to say "Saw the patch. Will review -- but it may be a month or two or three before I get the chance." Given the amount of spam on the list, without even an acknowledgement reply, first-time posters like me worry that our message was completely missed in all the noise.

I'll take Michael's advice and switch the cygwin distribution over to cvsnt, pending feedback from the cygwin community. Thanks for your time.


Michael Diers wrote:

first, thank you very much for your work on Cygwin. Awesome

IMHO, the CVS maintainers are extremely reluctant to incorporate
changes. It is quite common that even trivial and/or much-needed
patches will not make it into the distribution. I recall the
FreeBSD people trying a number of times to synch their changes
with upstream, to no avail.

I would expect the folks at cvsnt.org to be more
responsive. Note: cvsnt is *not* win32-only any more. Their
forked CVS has loads of fixes and features that have been
submitted on bug-cvs over the past few years. It's currently
synched with CVS 1.11, I believe.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]