On Sat, 27 Mar 2004, GARY VANSICKLE wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 27, 2004 at 03:05:11PM -0500, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > > I'd also like to see a formal justification for why a package should be > > included, remembering that we have a "software" web page at cygwin.com > > which can be used to advertise packages that aren't quite up to snuff > > for the cygwin release. I think we have accepted a couple of packages > > here > > which really only deserve to be advertised on the web site. > > Keep in mind that encouraging "unofficial" packages in this manner will: > > 1. Result in more packages that aren't reviewed by anybody (e.g. Harold) > and hence don't meet necessary Cygwin requirements (esp. FHS).
AFAIK none of the http://cygwin.com/ported.html were ever reviewed. > 2. Ergo will result in messages to cygwin@ of the template: "<software > web-page package> totally screws up Cygwin". > 4. Ergo will result in long, unproductive cygwin@ threads trying to tell > the OP what one sentence could: "You're on your own with these packages". For 2 and 4 you can make it clear on the above URL that such packages aren't official, and any discussion about them should take place on the application's mailing-list or directly with the authors. -- http://www.pervalidus.net/contact.html