From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Fergus Henderson To: Weiqi Gao Cc: cygwin@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: Cygwin participation threshold Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 23:02:00 -0000 Message-ID: <19990225192303.05069@mundook.cs.mu.OZ.AU> References: <13561.990222@is.lg.ua> <199902221654.LAA07362@envy.delorie.com> <19990222183222023.AAA254@carl_zmola> <19990223214848.A23525@cygnus.com> <19990225005148.53402@mundook.cs.mu.OZ.AU> <19990224121846.A25762@cygnus.com> <36D4C298.32C1C355@a.crl.com> X-SW-Source: 1999-02n/msg00814.html Message-ID: <19990228230200.R4XNYSoNWYk-6RGUnk1oMA9cVs_l5q3I54p8VPo-yR8@z> On 24-Feb-1999, Weiqi Gao wrote: > > Windows is too complicated. It usually takes a sharp individual a long > time (four years?) to become really proficient in Windows. And that > proficiency usually last a very short time (two years). All of their > knowledge would have been gained through the continued (and expensive) > subscription to MSDN. They usually don't feel compelled to contribute > to anything. That doesn't explain why they contribute more to djgpp than to cygwin. > It's the culture. Groups of Windows developers would sit around bashing > Unix. But that could well explain it. One thing that might help would be better mingw32 support. That might encourage people who would otherwise use djgpp to use cygwin instead. But I suppose they still wouldn't be likely to contribute to the winsup stuff. Someone else also commented that people who use cygwin probably run Linux when they can, and so don't get much chance to play around with cygwin. I think that is another very likely explanation. -- Fergus Henderson | "Binaries may die WWW: < http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh > | but source code lives forever" PGP: finger fjh@128.250.37.3 | -- leaked Microsoft memo. -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com