Re: [ATTN MAINTAINER] tig

[Adam Dinwoodie <adam@dinwoodie.org>]

On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 at 17:16, Libor Ukropec via Cygwin-apps wrote:
>
> Dne 12.12.2022 v 17:32 Adam Dinwoodie via Cygwin-apps napsal(a):
> > On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 11:15:35PM +0100, Libor Ukropec via Cygwin-apps wrote:
> >> Hello Jari,
> >>
> >> cygwin contains "tig" in version 2.4.1 (2019-07-30) and there's already
> >> 2.5.4 (2021) with many bug fixes and improvements available.
> >> Can I kindly ask whether it is possible to update the package?
> >> I do not see a git repository for the tig package, so I attached the cygport
> >> file if it can save you some effort (in compare to the following scallywag,
> >> I've added the LICENSE info the script)
> >>
> >> Scallywag report is here: https://github.com/cygwin/scallywag/actions/runs/3670966767
> >
> > I believe Jari's repo for the tig Cygwin packaging is on GitHub[0], and
> > it looks like it's using the old pre-Cygport packaging mechanism.  I've
> > not looked through that repo myself (yet, at least) but it looks like
> > there are some patches that imply a naïve build might not work
> > perfectly.  Or those packages might be entirely obsolete...
> I did not look for the GitHub, but the naive compile and run worked with few custom
> actions in the cygport script.
> >
> > [0]: https://github.com/jaalto/cygwin-package--tig
> >
> > FWIW, I'd be happy to at least attempt to add this package to my small
> > Cygwin Git packaging empire, and take responsibility for keeping it up
> > to date going forwards.  But that's only if Jari wants to relinquish
>
> Yes, let's wait for Jari's answer
> > that hat, and even then I think Libor clearly gets first refusal given
> > they've written the new Cygport file.
> >
> Here comes my weak English. Will I be refused by Jari or do you mean that I will refuse
> you because I did the Cygport file?
>
> If the latter, I have no objections you are the maintainer (let's wait for Jari), I just
> wanted to give a helpful hand, not only to rudely ask for the update. And also to play
> more with the cygports and expand my portfolio (I am shy to say `empire`)  :)

Apologies for the idioms! I mean that if Jari wants to stop being the
maintainer, you should be allowed to become the maintainer if you want
to, because you wrote the up-to-date cygport file.

"First refusal" means, essentially, that you get given the chance to
do something before anyone else does. In this case, you'd get the
option to become maintainer, and I would only get the option to do so
if you refused.