On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 07:40:13PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >On Apr 8 13:26, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 06:26:46PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> >On Apr 4 14:15, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> >> On Apr 3 20:49, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> >> > [responding to the thread which started it all] >> >> > On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 02:35:51PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> >> > >- We create a ftp://cygwin.com/pub/cygwin-1.7 dir. >> >> > > >> >> > >- Under that dir, we create the full release directory structure as it >> >> > > exists in the parallel cygwin dir, except for the "cygwin" itself. >> >> > >> >> > So far so good. >> > >> >I'm just not sure we should really call it "cygwin-1.7". What would >> >be a good name, which does not refer to the actual version number? >> > >> > "Cygwin" with uppercase C? >> > >> >I'm volunteering to create the directory layout... >> >> Too bad we can't call it cygwin2.dll. >> >> I don't think making it differ by case is a good idea. This is bound >> to cause problems for Windows somehow. >> >> cygwin-xp? cygwin-2008? > >cysta? :) > >cygwin-2008 isn't bad, though. > >> cygwin-nextgen? > >Or just cygwin-new, maybe. I'd take any of them, -new or -2008.
In my experience, adding a "new" to any directory or file is a guaranteed way of ensuring that the name will not always be accurate. How about cygwinng? cgf