From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28477 invoked by alias); 15 Apr 2008 03:00:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 28466 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Apr 2008 03:00:55 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from dessent.net (HELO dessent.net) (69.60.119.225) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 15 Apr 2008 03:00:27 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=dessent.net) by dessent.net with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JlbPF-0005DZ-Er for cygwin-apps@cygwin.com; Tue, 15 Apr 2008 03:00:25 +0000 Message-ID: <48041AC2.DA789E78@dessent.net> Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 03:00:00 -0000 From: Brian Dessent Reply-To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] Let's start a Cygwin 1.7 release area References: <20080411151333.GO23852@calimero.vinschen.de> <480014A9.62EF4E0F@dessent.net> <20080412113540.GD23852@calimero.vinschen.de> <20080412122232.GE23852@calimero.vinschen.de> <4800AF02.DC1B3AF5@dessent.net> <20080412151515.GG23852@calimero.vinschen.de> <48013F76.4D6B8FFC@dessent.net> <20080413094246.GJ23852@calimero.vinschen.de> <20080413193513.GA13302@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20080414095628.GA4069@calimero.vinschen.de> <20080414143631.GB18398@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Sender: cygwin-apps-owner@cygwin.com List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com X-SW-Source: 2008-04/txt/msg00195.txt.bz2 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 "Company ID" in the resource strings for cygwin1.dll, listing Red Hat always seemed a bit off to me, but I recognise that if we have to list a real company that Red Hat is the obvious choice. Brian