>Other than that I would think that the package would be ready for >submission. Any changes to support additional projects like Dokany, etc. >could easily happen in the future when those projects are ready.
Currently it is the package that is not ready for other additional projects. I saw that Mark already began to make some changes, I now have more time for this and will give a head to see how this could be made and come back with ideas of a main interface. 2016-09-20 23:12 GMT+02:00 Bill Zissimopoulos <billz...@navimatics.com>: > On 9/8/16, 1:03 AM, Mark Geisert wrote: > > >>I've changed Subject: to reflect what's being discussed now. When we >>have a >>consensus cygfuse I'll issue an ITP for it. >> >>I've now updated the cygfuse repository on GitHub so it is more neutral >>about >>FUSE implementations. It can be seen at >>https://github.com/mgeisert/cygfuse . >> >>I've also read up a little on Dokan and Dokany, so I should be able to >>better >>respond to any comments Adrien might have about the updated cygfuse. > > Mark, has there been any additional progress on this? > > Looking at the updated cygfuse I believe one change would be to rename > cygfuse.pc back to fuse.pc so that build configuration scripts can find > it. I have created a github issue for this. > > Other than that I would think that the package would be ready for > submission. Any changes to support additional projects like Dokany, etc. > could easily happen in the future when those projects are ready. > > Bill >
