On Apr 14 20:02, Brian Dessent wrote:
> Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
> > Yes, I know. I just don't think it clarifies anything to put a "Red
> > Hat" in the registry.
>
> I was thinking "Cygwin" would be better as well, but since it is
> supposed to be a two-level heirarchy how about
> "HK{LM,CU}\Software\Cygwin Project\Cygwin". It has always seemed to me
> that we actively try to de-emphasize any association that Red Hat has in
> the actual day-to-day operation of the project, other than owning the
> copyrights and having their own commercial fork. Likewise with the
Well, not exactly. I have done a lot of my 1.7 development lately on
blessed Red Hat time. The IPv6 changes and the long path name support
wouldn't be as progressed as they are if I hadn't got enough paid time
to do them. I don't think that deserves to be ignored.
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat
