On 5/21/2015 8:20 PM, Michael Enright wrote:
@Yaakov, many of us have a Cygwin requirement imposed on them for reasons that maybe even you would argue against. Given that Cygwin runs in a world where using GDI is economical and using X is costly, and given that downloading and installing updates is a burden that seems to grow ever larger as packages sprout dependencies on each other, I would like to see the emergence of a new consensus that clarifies to what extent X Windows is important to Cygwin as a whole. It clearly is important to some programs but is it so essential to the Cygwin ecosystem that the burden of using X is to be imposed on so many unwilling Cygwin users?
Dear Michael, please note that in the past we had GDI packages and all of them died as the maintenance burden was not matched by volunteers. The last one, perl-Win32-GUI, is in the same state. On TCL/TK, if I remember right we arrived at a point where it was not possible to compile other packages depending on it; its GDI leg was interfering with the unix root of the rest of cygwin, it was a mess. Going X we cut the knot. If you look at the list of maintainers https://cygwin.com/cygwin-pkg-maint you will notice that it is very very short. Basically: Corinna is handling the cygwin core Yaakov is handlig > 50% of the packages Jon is handling all the X server Achim is handling all perl Ken is handling all texlive Add me, Jary and Volker and we cover ~ 90% of all packages Please consider the additional burden you are asking to the limited maintainers' resources. Regards Marco -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple