On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 01:32:41PM -0500, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: >On Sun, 2012-10-21 at 13:10 -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: >>That said, is it time to ask the mingw.org stuff to relocate their CVS >>repo? I could tar up the affected CVS directories for them if so. > >What about some CVSROOT/modules magic to exclude winsup/mingw and >winsup/w32api from a Cygwin checkout? > >1) change the existing cygwin module to naked-cygwin; 2) add a new >cygwin module with "-a src-support naked-cygwin naked-newlib >naked-include"; 3) change the directions on cvs.html to "cvs co cygwin" >instead of "cvs co winsup" for new checkouts; 4) devs with existing >checkouts could just rm -fr winsup/mingw winsup/w32api if they so >choose (but with the patch, they won't be used anymore even if >present). > >As mingw.org already treats winsup/mingw and winsup/w32api as separate >repos[1], that should do the trick for us without forcing them to move. >Given our long-standing cooperation until now, I think it's the least >we could do.
I wasn't trying to punish anyone. I actually thought that they probably hadn't moved already mainly out of courtesy to us. I vaguely recall some rumbling about this in the past. I've cc'ed Earnie to see how he feels about it. Earnie, we seem to be transitioning from the need to have a mingw/w32api in the source tree. What do you think about removing these directories from the depot and moving repo to sourceforge, or some other place? You've got a home for as long as you like on sourceware.org but I was thinking that it might be advantageous for mingw to move anyway. If it helps, I can provide tar copies of the directories from sourceware. Alternately, I can also provide you with a top-level directory at sourceware.org if that is preferable. cgf
