On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 05:49:53PM -0500, Steven Penny wrote: >On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 08:12:46PM -0500, Steven Penny wrote: >>On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 7:04 PM, Chris J. Breisch wrote: >>>On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote: >>>> So the bottom line is that git's status is: missing a maintainer, hoping >>>> for someone to pick it up. >>> >>>You have short term memory? >> >> Do you? >> >> https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2014-05/msg00284.html >> >> From the same thread. Amazing that you missed that. > >You are out of your element, mate > >https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2014-05/msg00298.html
Nope. You are confused. Eric indicated 1) that he wanted to give up git and 2) he did not want to give up bash or coreutils. David Conrad was talking about git. So, as I said, we are missing a git maintainer even though we did have someone trying to take on that responsibility. You should be aware of what happened with git and should be able to discern a template for how to go about adopting it. Chest thumping and rambling essays aren't going to magically make you a maintainer. If you are interested then, as I mentioned in the link that you quoted, you have to learn the rules for becoming a maintainer. You don't need me to touch your shoulders with a sword to make things happen. Oh, and just in case I get quoted in the future again, I'll make it clear again: I'm talking about git, not coreutils or bash. cgf -- 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