On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 07:40:38PM +0000, David Stacey wrote: >I am a professional software engineer, and Cygwin is one of the tools I >use for my day job. Cygwin is great because it gives me a little Linux >loveliness in a big bad Windows world. But I don't use Cygwin in >isolation - I have many development tools that I use in a Windows >environment, and, yes, one of those is TortoiseSVN. > >Cygwin /has/ to function alongside the other development tools I use - >if it can't then I lose interest rapidly. And that means I need Cygwin >svn and TortoiseSVN to play nicely. > >Now, I understand the desire for POSIX purity - such aims are laudable >and highly commendable. However, when such ideals stand between me and >getting paid then I take a different view. To put it bluntly, I really >don't care if Cygwin svn uses POSIX locks, Windows locks or anyone >else's locks - as long as it works.
To put it bluntly - I don't care. You have the source. If you are a professional software engineer you can build things yourself exactly how you like them. We don't have to change the goals of our project to accommodate you. Complaining that things don't work perfectly for you when you download the software for free and have the ability to chart your own course is not really a compelling argument. >I rather suspect that I am not alone and there are other Cygwin users in >a similar situation. The old "I rather suspect I am not alone" argument is pointless when you're responding to a message which enumerates responses from the both sides of the issue. In fact it is pointless even if those weren't already in evidence. >Apologies for the rant, We've already heard these complaints so it is difficult to see the point. 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
