Cygwin kill utility //Was: cgwin_internal(): difference b/w CW_CYGWIN_PID_TO_WINPID and CW_GETPINFO_FULL for taking only dwProcessId ?

Cygwin kill utility //Was: cgwin_internal(): difference b/w CW_CYGWIN_PID_TO_WINPID and CW_GETPINFO_FULL for taking only dwProcessId ?

[Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C]]

Hello,

It looks like in order to effectively kill the process by Windows means (i.e. what Cygwin "kill -f" is supposed to do),
the process handle must be obtained with the SYNCHRONIZE right (in addition to PROCESS_TERMINATE), otherwise
WaitForSingleObject() fails with code 5, permission denied (at least for a regular user, i.e. not an administrator).

That's about this portion of kill.cc located at winsup\utils:

  HANDLE h = OpenProcess (PROCESS_TERMINATE, FALSE, (DWORD) dwpid);
  if (!h)
    {
      if (!wait || GetLastError () != ERROR_INVALID_PARAMETER)
	fprintf (stderr, "%s: couldn't open pid %u\n",
		 prog_name, (unsigned) dwpid);
      return;
    }
  if (!wait || WaitForSingleObject (h, 200) != WAIT_OBJECT_0)
    if (sig && !TerminateProcess (h, sig << 8)
	&& WaitForSingleObject (h, 200) != WAIT_OBJECT_0)
      fprintf (stderr, "%s: couldn't kill pid %u, %lu\n",
	       prog_name, (unsigned) dwpid, GetLastError ());

MSDN is in agreement with the observed behavior (access denied),

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms684320%28v=vs.85%29.aspx

<quote>
The handle returned by the OpenProcess function can be used in any function that requires a handle to a process, such as the wait functions, provided the appropriate access rights were requested.
</quote>

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms684880%28v=vs.85%29.aspx

HTH,

Anton Lavrentiev
Contractor NIH/NLM/NCBI

Re: Cygwin kill utility //Was: cgwin_internal(): difference b/w CW_CYGWIN_PID_TO_WINPID and CW_GETPINFO_FULL for taking only dwProcessId ?

[Christopher Faylor]

On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 03:01:18AM +0000, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] wrote:
>Hello,
>
>It looks like in order to effectively kill the process by Windows means (i.e. what Cygwin "kill -f" is supposed to do),
>the process handle must be obtained with the SYNCHRONIZE right (in addition to PROCESS_TERMINATE), otherwise
>WaitForSingleObject() fails with code 5, permission denied (at least for a regular user, i.e. not an administrator).
>
>That's about this portion of kill.cc located at winsup\utils:
>
>  HANDLE h = OpenProcess (PROCESS_TERMINATE, FALSE, (DWORD) dwpid);
>  if (!h)
>    {
>      if (!wait || GetLastError () != ERROR_INVALID_PARAMETER)
>	fprintf (stderr, "%s: couldn't open pid %u\n",
>		 prog_name, (unsigned) dwpid);
>      return;
>    }
>  if (!wait || WaitForSingleObject (h, 200) != WAIT_OBJECT_0)
>    if (sig && !TerminateProcess (h, sig << 8)
>	&& WaitForSingleObject (h, 200) != WAIT_OBJECT_0)
>      fprintf (stderr, "%s: couldn't kill pid %u, %lu\n",
>	       prog_name, (unsigned) dwpid, GetLastError ());
>
>MSDN is in agreement with the observed behavior (access denied),
>
>http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms684320%28v=vs.85%29.aspx
>
><quote>
>The handle returned by the OpenProcess function can be used in any function that requires a handle to a process, such as the wait functions, provided the appropriate access rights were requested.
></quote>
>
>http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms684880%28v=vs.85%29.aspx

If only there was some way to programatically supply a change in source
code from party A which could be applied to the source code by party B,
along with a description which logs the change.  Nah.  Maybe we'll have
something when the Singularity finally occurs.

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

RE: Cygwin kill utility //Was: cgwin_internal(): difference b/w CW_CYGWIN_PID_TO_WINPID and CW_GETPINFO_FULL for taking only dwProcessId ?

[Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C]]

> Nah.  Maybe we'll have something when the Singularity finally occurs.

I cannot supply patches for you guys because of the GPL.  No need to be sarcastic all the time --
for the project lead it does not sound witty.

Anton Lavrentiev
Contractor NIH/NLM/NCBI


--
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

Re: Cygwin kill utility //Was: cgwin_internal(): difference b/w CW_CYGWIN_PID_TO_WINPID and CW_GETPINFO_FULL for taking only dwProcessId ?

[Corinna Vinschen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 779 bytes --]

On Apr  8 03:30, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] wrote:
> > Nah.  Maybe we'll have something when the Singularity finally occurs.
> 
> I cannot supply patches for you guys because of the GPL.

What on earth keeps you from sending patches to a GPLed project while at
the same time using it is no problem at all?  That doesn't make sense to
me.  Also, see http://cygwin.com/contrib.html.  You don't have to sign
a copyright assignment for trivial patches.

> No need to be sarcastic all the time --

It's not so much sarcasm, but frustration that so few people contribute
to the Cygwin code itself.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

RE: Cygwin kill utility //Was: cgwin_internal(): difference b/w CW_CYGWIN_PID_TO_WINPID and CW_GETPINFO_FULL for taking only dwProcessId ?

[Buchbinder, Barry (NIH/NIAID) [E]]

Corinna Vinschen sent the following at Tuesday, April 08, 2014 5:01 AM
>On Apr 8 03:30, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] wrote:
>>> I cannot supply patches for you guys because of the GPL.
>
>What on earth keeps you from sending patches to a GPLed project while at
>the same time using it is no problem at all? That doesn't make sense to
>me. Also, see http://cygwin.com/contrib.html. You don't have to sign a
>copyright assignment for trivial patches.

He's a contractor for the US Government.  That makes things complicated
and sometimes seemingly nonsensical.

That's not sarcasm.  I work in an intellectual property office at NIH.
I spend a significant part of my working day trying to explain why the US
government cannot do things that is just normal business for everyone else.

- Barry
  Disclaimer: Statements made herein are not made on behalf of NIAID.

RE: Cygwin kill utility //Was: cgwin_internal(): difference b/w CW_CYGWIN_PID_TO_WINPID and CW_GETPINFO_FULL for taking only dwProcessId ?

[Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C]]

> He's a contractor for the US Government.  That makes things complicated and sometimes seemingly nonsensical.

Thanks, Barry.

A patch (however small) means code, all my code must under the Public Domain Notice (and which can't be GPL'd).  Thus, our legal
office does not allow us contributing any such code, but verbal description of a problem (hence not constituting code per se) is okay.

Anton Lavrentiev
Contractor NIH/NLM/NCBI

--
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

Re: Cygwin kill utility //Was: cgwin_internal(): difference b/w CW_CYGWIN_PID_TO_WINPID and CW_GETPINFO_FULL for taking only dwProcessId ?

[Christopher Faylor]

On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 01:34:21PM +0000, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] wrote:
>>He's a contractor for the US Government.  That makes things complicated
>>and sometimes seemingly nonsensical.
>
>A patch (however small) means code, all my code must under the Public
>Domain Notice (and which can't be GPL'd).  Thus, our legal office does
>not allow us contributing any such code, but verbal description of a
>problem (hence not constituting code per se) is okay.

If only there was some way to use meaning units to explain legal,
business, or ethical limitations ahead of time which would preclude back
and forth mailing list communications.

Non-sarcastic translation: Don't expect us to know about your s**t.  We
have standard expectations for this free software project and the
expectations are do not include keeping a mental map of the rules of
every email domain that sends messages here so that we can avoid asking
for a patch.

I'm with Corinna in wondering how you can use GPLed software at all if
you are so limited.

--
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

Re: Cygwin kill utility //Was: cgwin_internal(): difference b/w CW_CYGWIN_PID_TO_WINPID and CW_GETPINFO_FULL for taking only dwProcessId ?

[Adam Dinwoodie]

On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 01:34:21PM +0000, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] wrote:
> > He's a contractor for the US Government.  That makes things complicated and sometimes seemingly nonsensical.
> 
> Thanks, Barry.
> 
> A patch (however small) means code, all my code must under the Public Domain Notice (and which can't be GPL'd).  Thus, our legal
> office does not allow us contributing any such code, but verbal description of a problem (hence not constituting code per se) is okay.

I'm not sure what *the* Public Domain Notice is, but I don't know of any
public domain "licence" or declaration which isn't compatible with the
GNU GPL.  The FSF seems to agree:
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#PublicDomain

If you provide a patch with a disclaimer that you are putting the patch
in the public domain, I would expect Corinna/cgf/Red Hat would be able
to incorporate it into the project.  They can then distribute it under
the GPL without you needing to do any of the copyright assignment or
distributing anything under the GPL yourself.

--
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

Re: Cygwin kill utility //Was: cgwin_internal(): difference b/w CW_CYGWIN_PID_TO_WINPID and CW_GETPINFO_FULL for taking only dwProcessId ?

[Corinna Vinschen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1433 bytes --]

On Apr  8 16:44, Adam Dinwoodie wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 01:34:21PM +0000, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] wrote:
> > > He's a contractor for the US Government.  That makes things complicated and sometimes seemingly nonsensical.
> > 
> > Thanks, Barry.
> > 
> > A patch (however small) means code, all my code must under the Public Domain Notice (and which can't be GPL'd).  Thus, our legal
> > office does not allow us contributing any such code, but verbal description of a problem (hence not constituting code per se) is okay.
> 
> I'm not sure what *the* Public Domain Notice is, but I don't know of any
> public domain "licence" or declaration which isn't compatible with the
> GNU GPL.  The FSF seems to agree:
> https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#PublicDomain
> 
> If you provide a patch with a disclaimer that you are putting the patch
> in the public domain, I would expect Corinna/cgf/Red Hat would be able
> to incorporate it into the project.  They can then distribute it under
> the GPL without you needing to do any of the copyright assignment or
> distributing anything under the GPL yourself.

Right, as long as it falls under the trivial patch rule.  We usually
draw the line at about 10 lines of changes.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: Cygwin kill utility //Was: cgwin_internal(): difference b/w CW_CYGWIN_PID_TO_WINPID and CW_GETPINFO_FULL for taking only dwProcessId ?

[Christopher Faylor]

On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 05:50:26PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Apr  8 16:44, Adam Dinwoodie wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 01:34:21PM +0000, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] wrote:
>> > > He's a contractor for the US Government.  That makes things complicated and sometimes seemingly nonsensical.
>> > 
>> > Thanks, Barry.
>> > 
>> > A patch (however small) means code, all my code must under the Public Domain Notice (and which can't be GPL'd).  Thus, our legal
>> > office does not allow us contributing any such code, but verbal description of a problem (hence not constituting code per se) is okay.
>> 
>> I'm not sure what *the* Public Domain Notice is, but I don't know of any
>> public domain "licence" or declaration which isn't compatible with the
>> GNU GPL.  The FSF seems to agree:
>> https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#PublicDomain
>> 
>> If you provide a patch with a disclaimer that you are putting the patch
>> in the public domain, I would expect Corinna/cgf/Red Hat would be able
>> to incorporate it into the project.  They can then distribute it under
>> the GPL without you needing to do any of the copyright assignment or
>> distributing anything under the GPL yourself.
>
>Right, as long as it falls under the trivial patch rule.  We usually
>draw the line at about 10 lines of changes.

I'm assuming that it isn't just as trivial as "it's public domain" since
the government is involved.

--
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

Re: Cygwin kill utility //Was: cgwin_internal(): difference b/w CW_CYGWIN_PID_TO_WINPID and CW_GETPINFO_FULL for taking only dwProcessId ?

[Tim Prince]

On 4/8/2014 11:21 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> Non-sarcastic translation: Don't expect us to know about your s**t. We 
> have standard expectations for this free software project and the 
> expectations are do not include keeping a mental map of the rules of 
> every email domain that sends messages here so that we can avoid 
> asking for a patch. I'm with Corinna in wondering how you can use 
> GPLed software at all if you are so limited.
Now that I'm retired, if I thought there were any point in figuring out 
why gcc test suite fails to kill the hung tests, I'd be happy to send 
any patch.  This comment appears to imply there is no point. Meanwhile, 
I go to Windows task manager and kill them manually, so they report XPASS.
My former employer permitted only employees with a job description 
including support of open source software to submit patches, even though 
we all had to take the annual quiz about GPL etc.  That employer has 
products which run under cygwin bash (not linked against cygwin1.dll), 
some so intended, more of them not.

-- 
Tim Prince


--
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

Re: Cygwin kill utility //Was: cgwin_internal(): difference b/w CW_CYGWIN_PID_TO_WINPID and CW_GETPINFO_FULL for taking only dwProcessId ?

[Christopher Faylor]

On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 12:27:26PM -0400, Tim Prince wrote:
>
>On 4/8/2014 11:21 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> Non-sarcastic translation: Don't expect us to know about your s**t. We 
>> have standard expectations for this free software project and the 
>> expectations are do not include keeping a mental map of the rules of 
>> every email domain that sends messages here so that we can avoid 
>> asking for a patch. I'm with Corinna in wondering how you can use 
>> GPLed software at all if you are so limited.
>Now that I'm retired, if I thought there were any point in figuring out 
>why gcc test suite fails to kill the hung tests, I'd be happy to send 
>any patch.  This comment appears to imply there is no point.

Huh?  We consistently ask for patches.  The whole POINT of this thread
was that we want patches.

>Meanwhile, I go to Windows task manager and kill them manually, so they
>report XPASS.  My former employer permitted only employees with a job
>description including support of open source software to submit
>patches, even though we all had to take the annual quiz about GPL etc.
>That employer has products which run under cygwin bash (not linked
>against cygwin1.dll), some so intended, more of them not.

Hopefully everyone is aware of the fact that employers have restrictions
on what kind of code their employees can publish.

I'll make my point again so that someone else can creatively
misinterpret it: If you have tracked down a problem and think you see a
fix then we appreciate patches.  If you can't send a patch because it
isn't allowed then MAKE THAT POINT CLEAR UP FRONT.  Otherwise, you're
courting a needless back and forth interaction.

FYI, if you can't send a patch, don't expect that you have people on
call standing by who will be happy to make code changes for you.  While
I do appreciate that some organizations have stringent rules that
doesn't mean that I (and I assume Corinna) want to reprioritize our
lives to deal with creatively editing code to deal with an issue that
you found.  We may get to it eventually but the lack of patch puts
the change down on the priority queue.

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

Re: Cygwin kill utility //Was: cgwin_internal(): difference b/w CW_CYGWIN_PID_TO_WINPID and CW_GETPINFO_FULL for taking only dwProcessId ?

[Corinna Vinschen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2784 bytes --]

On Apr  8 12:49, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 12:27:26PM -0400, Tim Prince wrote:
> >
> >On 4/8/2014 11:21 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >> Non-sarcastic translation: Don't expect us to know about your s**t. We 
> >> have standard expectations for this free software project and the 
> >> expectations are do not include keeping a mental map of the rules of 
> >> every email domain that sends messages here so that we can avoid 
> >> asking for a patch. I'm with Corinna in wondering how you can use 
> >> GPLed software at all if you are so limited.
> >Now that I'm retired, if I thought there were any point in figuring out 
> >why gcc test suite fails to kill the hung tests, I'd be happy to send 
> >any patch.  This comment appears to imply there is no point.
> 
> Huh?  We consistently ask for patches.  The whole POINT of this thread
> was that we want patches.
> 
> >Meanwhile, I go to Windows task manager and kill them manually, so they
> >report XPASS.  My former employer permitted only employees with a job
> >description including support of open source software to submit
> >patches, even though we all had to take the annual quiz about GPL etc.
> >That employer has products which run under cygwin bash (not linked
> >against cygwin1.dll), some so intended, more of them not.
> 
> Hopefully everyone is aware of the fact that employers have restrictions
> on what kind of code their employees can publish.
> 
> I'll make my point again so that someone else can creatively
> misinterpret it: If you have tracked down a problem and think you see a
> fix then we appreciate patches.  If you can't send a patch because it
> isn't allowed then MAKE THAT POINT CLEAR UP FRONT.  Otherwise, you're
> courting a needless back and forth interaction.
> 
> FYI, if you can't send a patch, don't expect that you have people on
> call standing by who will be happy to make code changes for you.  While
> I do appreciate that some organizations have stringent rules that
> doesn't mean that I (and I assume Corinna) want to reprioritize our
> lives to deal with creatively editing code to deal with an issue that
> you found.  We may get to it eventually but the lack of patch puts
> the change down on the priority queue.

What he says.

And just if it's still not clear, despite the fact that WJM, we would
*love* to get more patches.  It doesn't mean your patch will go in
without scrutinizing and maybe we ask for changes, but we're always open
to bug fixes and cool new functionality, as long as it's POSIXy (or
Linuxy in case they differ).


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

RE: Cygwin kill utility //Was: cgwin_internal(): difference b/w CW_CYGWIN_PID_TO_WINPID and CW_GETPINFO_FULL for taking only dwProcessId ?

[Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C]]

> The whole POINT of this thread was that we want patches.

You've just killed that point, alright.  The change I was about, was merely a word-long (another keyword to be added),
the discussion that sparkled was just despicable.

The response was so earful, with profanities and teaching me (?) legal stuff as well, that I can't longer
be on this list.  From the first moment on I noticed how rude the replies can be, and how folks
running the very project allowed themselves to leash out.  I did not set the rules, and I tried to be helpful
here to my best:  I found a few bugs and they got confirmed, but I am no longer at position to do any more
of this.  I get it, you don't want the feedback the way I can provide, but I can't do it differently, either.

Please spare yourself time responding to the above, I'm not going to read it.

Anton Lavrentiev
Contractor NIH/NLM/NCBI


--
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

Re: Cygwin kill utility //Was: cgwin_internal(): difference b/w CW_CYGWIN_PID_TO_WINPID and CW_GETPINFO_FULL for taking only dwProcessId ?

[Christopher Faylor]

On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 07:46:26PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>What he says.
>
>And just if it's still not clear, despite the fact that WJM, we would
>*love* to get more patches.  It doesn't mean your patch will go in
>without scrutinizing and maybe we ask for changes, but we're always open
>to bug fixes and cool new functionality, as long as it's POSIXy (or
>Linuxy in case they differ).

Just an added clarification: Lack of patches may result in hilarious
Thursday/feline comments from me.

gf

--
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

We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 05:59:53PM +0000, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] wrote:
>> The whole POINT of this thread was that we want patches.
>
>You've just killed that point, alright.  The change I was about, was
>merely a word-long (another keyword to be added), the discussion that
>sparkled was just despicable.

You are the guy who called my spam blocking software "stupid" so I
don't think your high ground is that elevated.

>The response was so earful, with profanities and teaching me (?) legal

I apologize for the implied profanity.  I very rarely go there but I do
find the confusion around these discussions pretty frustrating.  That is
not an excuse though.  I shouldn't have done it.

It is likely hard to put yourself in the shoes of developers running
a project but if we don't push back on people sending "suggestions" we
end up with a mailing list full of suggestions with people who expect
that their suggestions will be carried out.

It is a little known fact that one of Corinna's early messages was
actually a suggestion.  I suggested to *her* that a patch would be
considered.  She took that as a challenge and provided a patch.
Apparently Corinna is quite unique (we all know that now), at least as
far as the Cygwin ecosphere is concerned.

>Please spare yourself time responding to the above, I'm not going to
>read it.

Good luck in your future endeavors.

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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Steven Penny]

On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> It is a little known fact that one of Corinna's early messages was
> actually a suggestion.  I suggested to *her* that a patch would be
> considered.  She took that as a challenge and provided a patch.
> Apparently Corinna is quite unique (we all know that now), at least as
> far as the Cygwin ecosphere is concerned.

I would like to contribute, but the current system sucks, to be frank. As far as
I can tell this is the current repo

  http://cygwin.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/winsup/?cvsroot=src

but then you can also find this

  http://cygwin.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi

which has about 50 "CVS Root"s. I dont know if these roots are all Cygwin or
what. All of this fails to mention that nowhere will you find a search function,
which is a huge fail. Compare to GitHub, which has

- search multiple repos at same time
- or search individual repo
- issue tracker
- you can go into the source code of a single file and comment on a single line,
  that is powerful stuff. Example
  http://github.com/svnpenn/bm/commit/1519bcb
- pull requests
- wiki for each repo
- binary downloads
- commit logs

of which current CVS does not have, or has crappy incarnation. I know this post
may seem rude, but I have good intent. I also would like to see Cygwin improve,
but you have to make it easier for people to do so.

--
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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 09:20:59PM -0500, Steven Penny wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>It is a little known fact that one of Corinna's early messages was
>>actually a suggestion.  I suggested to *her* that a patch would be
>>considered.  She took that as a challenge and provided a patch.
>>Apparently Corinna is quite unique (we all know that now), at least as
>>far as the Cygwin ecosphere is concerned.
>
>I would like to contribute, but the current system sucks, to be frank.

The problem with being frank is that you stand the chance of looking
uninformed if you didn't do some basic research.

>As far as I can tell this is the current repo
>
>http://cygwin.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/winsup/?cvsroot=src

That's the web representation of the Cygwin CVS tree.  If you don't know
how to translate that into a cvs command you shouldn't bother.

>but then you can also find this
>
>  http://cygwin.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi

cygwin.com == sourceware.org == gcc.gnu.org.  You're looking at the
top-level (mostly unused these days) CVS repo for sourceware.org.  That
contains the Cygwin CVS repository but it isn't the right way to get
the information for checking out Cygwin.

Instructions on how to check out the source are available at the cygwin web
site, just like they are at every open source site.  Go to the cygwin web
page and look to the left.  You'll see "Contributing" and "Source in CVS".
Both lead you to instructions.  "Contributing" is intended to help with
providing patches.  "Source in CVS" is obvious.

Yes, I know.  Git is better than CVS.

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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Steven Penny]

On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 10:28 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> Instructions on how to check out the source are available at the cygwin web
> site, just like they are at every open source site.  Go to the cygwin web
> page and look to the left.  You'll see "Contributing" and "Source in CVS".
> Both lead you to instructions.  "Contributing" is intended to help with
> providing patches.  "Source in CVS" is obvious.

I dont think you "get" my and perhaps other people's workflow. It goes like this

1. discover something that isnt working
2. go to web repo
3. search existing issues
4. search current codebase, online, to find offending file/line
5. if it looks like something I can fix then clone/checkout

Notice a checkout is not even done until step 5, with steps 1-4 all being done
through web interface. This is important. Your users (read: potential devs)
should not have to do a clone just to see the problem in the code.

Of course once I reach step 5 things are much smoother because you can work with
the local codebase. However if you cannot offer steps 1-4 then you are only
"tying one hand behind your back" and all the whining on the mailing list wont
fix that.

--
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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 12:04:09AM -0500, Steven Penny wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 10:28 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> Instructions on how to check out the source are available at the cygwin web
>> site, just like they are at every open source site.  Go to the cygwin web
>> page and look to the left.  You'll see "Contributing" and "Source in CVS".
>> Both lead you to instructions.  "Contributing" is intended to help with
>> providing patches.  "Source in CVS" is obvious.
>
>I dont think you "get" my and perhaps other people's workflow.  It goes
>like this

I replied directly to your observation that you couldn't find the Cygwin
source control information by pointing you at the places you apparently
missed on the Cygwin web page.  So I'm pretty sure that I got it.  I
checked your message multiple times to make sure that I didn't miss a
reference to the places on the web page which talk about the CVS
repository.

So, if you think that I missed your point then I don't think you stated
it clearly.

>1. discover something that isnt working
>2. go to web repo

Which is referenced in the link I provided.

>3. search existing issues

That would be the mailing list archives (as advertised) but also, see below.

>4. search current codebase, online, to find offending file/line

That would be the "web repo", assuming you are using terminology correctly.

>5. if it looks like something I can fix then clone/checkout

Instructions for which are in the link I provided.

>Notice a checkout is not even done until step 5, with steps 1-4 all
>being done through web interface.  This is important.  Your users
>(read: potential devs) should not have to do a clone just to see the
>problem in the code.

You don't seem to have gotten the fact that I pointed you at a page
which had a pointer to the web repo (which you puzzlingly had already
found).  Also, you probably should try to use correct terminology if you
are trying to make a point.  CVS doesn't "clone".

Except for the lack of an advertised bugzilla link at the Cygwin web
page, Cygwin is like every one of the other projects hosted at
sourceware.org/gcc.gnu.org.  This includes thriving projects like gcc,
binutils, gdb, and others.  All of the developers in those projects were
able to figure out how to find CVS (svn, git) web information and,
eventually, check out their stuff.

Cygwin is a thriving project but only because we have lots of package
maintainers and two dedicated DLL maintainers.  It's thriving because we
have a lot of users.  We don't, unlike gcc, gdb, binutils, or newlib
have a lot of developers.  That is likely because the Windows nature of
the project means that we get a different class of users than, e.g.,
gcc.  It's not because it so amazingly difficult to navigate
http://cygwin.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/winsup/?cvsroot=src or check
out code.

Cygwin does differ from the abovementioned projects in that it has a lot
more content available to attempt to explain things like mailing lists
and installation.  That is, again, because it seems like we don't
attract a highly technical audience who can figure this out without a
some help.

Corinna (a Red Hat employee) and I are both involved in open source
projects.  I know (I wouldn't speak for Corinna) how laughable (I use
that term because you obviously like frankness) it is to say that it's
hard to get to the source control.  It simply isn't true.  We use the
same model as lots of other open source sites.  We are behind the times
because we haven't switched to git yet but, since we didn't have many
developers when git wasn't around, it's hard to see how git is the
gating factor.

Anway, we have been contemplating advertising Cygwin's bugzilla but
neither Corinna nor I are keen on policing what could degenerate into
scores of "Command not found" bug reports.  If someone wants to
volunteer to be a bugzilla cop I'd love to deputize them.

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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Steven Penny]

On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:51 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> Except for the lack of an advertised bugzilla link at the Cygwin web
> page, Cygwin is like every one of the other projects hosted at
> sourceware.org/gcc.gnu.org.  This includes thriving projects like gcc,
> binutils, gdb, and others.  All of the developers in those projects were
> able to figure out how to find CVS (svn, git) web information and,
> eventually, check out their stuff.

I see now you have Stockholm Syndrome with CVS. Perhaps you missed the question,
so I will repeat it:

Where is the online search function for the mailing list and code base? With
GitHub you can use this

  http://github.com/svnpenn/bm/search?q=asdf

and it will search all issues and code for a repository. Cygwin appears to have
no web based way of searching either, besides a Google search. That is sad.

--
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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 09:55:51AM -0500, Steven Penny wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:51 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> Except for the lack of an advertised bugzilla link at the Cygwin web
>> page, Cygwin is like every one of the other projects hosted at
>> sourceware.org/gcc.gnu.org.  This includes thriving projects like gcc,
>> binutils, gdb, and others.  All of the developers in those projects were
>> able to figure out how to find CVS (svn, git) web information and,
>> eventually, check out their stuff.
>
>I see now you have Stockholm Syndrome with CVS. Perhaps you missed the question,
>so I will repeat it:

I'm sorry.  You're absolutely right.  I completely missed your assertion
that web search of the code base was crucial to any contributions.

So, to rephrase for my clarification:

You went to the advertised link for the CVS web repository and didn't
see any way to search the repository.  You use the search functionality
that gitweb provides all of the time and think it would benefit Cygwin.

I'll see what I can do about upgrading to using a more modern view which
allows search.  I assume that the contribution floodgate will open.

>Where is the online search function for the mailing list and code base? With
>GitHub you can use this
>
>  http://github.com/svnpenn/bm/search?q=asdf
>
>and it will search all issues and code for a repository. Cygwin appears to have
>no web based way of searching either, besides a Google search. That is sad.

I'll once again point out that gdb, binutils, and gcc seem to get by
just fine without this.  And, maybe I missed something, but I don't see
search on sourceforge.net either.  Given that, I don't see how this can
be a huge barrier to entry.

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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 12:37:10PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>I'll see what I can do about upgrading to using a more modern view which
>allows search.  I assume that the contribution floodgate will open.

Actually, I guess I won't.  Here's what the web browsing software has to
say about searching:

## use_re_search: Enable regular expression search of files in a directory.
##
## SECURITY WARNING: Since a user can enter the regular expression, it
## is possible for them to enter an expression with many alternatives
## and a lot of backtracking. Executing that search over thousands of
## lines over dozens of files can easily tie up a server for a long
## period of time.  This option should only be used on sites with

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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Warren Young]

On 4/9/2014 08:55, Steven Penny wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:51 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
> I see now you have Stockholm Syndrome with CVS.

CVS sucks.  No new project should be started on CVS today.

HOWEVER:

If you think web code repository searching and a public bug tracker are 
primary barriers to contribution, you aren't being honest with yourself. 
  They are nice, but not necessary.

Neither is it necessary to switch everything off of a custom CVS system 
onto Github in order for Cygwin to succeed.  I give you proof by 
existence: ta daaa!

I say all of this as one who has expressed a wish for Cygwin to move to 
a better VCS at least once in the past; probably more than once.  The 
need to use CVS did not stop me from contributing a few small patches 
over the years.  It didn't even present a serious impediment.  Further, 
I managed to escape the experience without any PTSD. <tic><tic>

So yeah, it would be nice if Cygwin were on a modern VCS.  Personally, 
I'd like to see it on Fossil, since that has a built-in wiki and bug 
tracker.  Plus, it's worlds simpler than Git, and its model matches that 
of the Cygwin development structure better.

It would *also* be nice if you scraped up some fortitude tried working 
with Cygwin as you find it, instead of putting preconditions on others 
before you can start contributing.  It really is not that hard.

> That is sad.

First world problem.

--
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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Steven Penny]

On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> I'll once again point out that gdb, binutils, and gcc seem to get by
> just fine without this.  And, maybe I missed something, but I don't see
> search on sourceforge.net either.  Given that, I don't see how this can
> be a huge barrier to entry.

Noted. However this is an irrelevant conclusion. The fact that they are
successful does not mean Cygwin wont benefit from a search function.

On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Warren Young wrote:
> If you think web code repository searching and a public bug tracker are
> primary barriers to contribution, you aren't being honest with yourself.
> They are nice, but not necessary.

I am honest with myself. I, as everyone have limited time. I will not waste my
time with an archaic system and maintainers who fail to see the light of day
when there are better ways I can spend my time, example

  http://github.com/stars/svnpenn

--
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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 10:50:20AM -0600, Warren Young wrote:
>I say all of this as one who has expressed a wish for Cygwin to move to 
>a better VCS at least once in the past; probably more than once.  The 
>need to use CVS did not stop me from contributing a few small patches 
>over the years.  It didn't even present a serious impediment.  Further, 
>I managed to escape the experience without any PTSD. <tic><tic>

And, this gives me the opportunity to say a belated thank-you to you and
other people who have managed, despite all odds, to contribute.

Here's a knocked together list from the last 13-or-so years of Cygwin.

Chris January		John Bowman		Ryan C. Gordon
Christian Franke	John Carey		Ryan Johnson
Christian Lestrade	Jon TURNEY		Salvador Eduardo Tropea
Christophe Jaillet	Kai Tietz		Sam Steingold
Christopher January	Karellen		Scott Finneran
Conrad Scott		Kazuhiro Fujieda	Sergey Ivanov
Craig MacGregor		Keith Seitz		Sergey Okhapkin
Craig McGeachie		Ken Brown		Silvio Laguzzi
Danny Smith		Lars Munch		Sjors Gielen
Dave Korn		Lev Bishop		Steven O'Brien
David Billinghurst	Marco Atzeri		Steve Osborn
David Huang		Mark Bradshaw		Thomas Pfaff
David Jade		Mark Paulus		Thomas Stalder
David MacMahon		Max Kaehn		Thomas Wolff
David Rothenberger	Michael Gorse		Tomas Ukkonen
Denis Excoffier		Micha Nelissen		Tor Perkins
Diego Biurrun		Mikael Ylikoski		Troy Curtiss
Dmitry Timoshkov	Mike Simons		Vaclav Haisman
Doru Carastan		Mumit Khan		Václav Zeman
Dr. Volker Zell		Nicholas S. Wourms	Vadim Egorov
Earl Chew		Nicholas Wourms		Wu Yongwei
Earnie Boyd		Nick Duffek		Yaakov Selkowitz
Egor Duda		Norbert Schulze		Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes
Eric Blake		N Stephens		Алексей Павлов
Ernie Coskrey

Apologies if I missed anyone.

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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Robert Pendell]

On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Steven Penny <...> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:51 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> Except for the lack of an advertised bugzilla link at the Cygwin web
>> page, Cygwin is like every one of the other projects hosted at
>> sourceware.org/gcc.gnu.org.  This includes thriving projects like gcc,
>> binutils, gdb, and others.  All of the developers in those projects were
>> able to figure out how to find CVS (svn, git) web information and,
>> eventually, check out their stuff.
>
> I see now you have Stockholm Syndrome with CVS. Perhaps you missed the question,
> so I will repeat it:
>
> Where is the online search function for the mailing list and code base? With
> GitHub you can use this
>
>   http://github.com/svnpenn/bm/search?q=asdf
>
> and it will search all issues and code for a repository. Cygwin appears to have
> no web based way of searching either, besides a Google search. That is sad.
>

For the code no such function exists.  You will have to make do with
downloading the code from CVS and using local tools to grep and search
through it.  As it stands cgf has already mentioned the page that
tells you quite clearly how to download from CVS and (if you are a
contributor) how to upload as well.  The mailing list does have a
search function.  Go to the lists page (http://cygwin.com/lists.html)
and choose the list you want to search.  There is a nice search box on
each mailing list so that you can look for previous reports of an
issue.

Robert Pendell
A perfect world is one of chaos.

--
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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 12:02:46PM -0500, Steven Penny wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> I'll once again point out that gdb, binutils, and gcc seem to get by
>> just fine without this.  And, maybe I missed something, but I don't see
>> search on sourceforge.net either.  Given that, I don't see how this can
>> be a huge barrier to entry.
>
>Noted. However this is an irrelevant conclusion. The fact that they are
>successful does not mean Cygwin wont benefit from a search function.

You clipped the part where I said "I'll see what I can do" and then offered
a followup as to why it may not be a good idea to have a search function.

I didn't say that a search function wouldn't be useful.  I said that it
can't be a huge barrier to entry given the fact that many popular
projects don't have that kind of functionality.

>On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Warren Young wrote:
>> If you think web code repository searching and a public bug tracker are
>> primary barriers to contribution, you aren't being honest with yourself.
>> They are nice, but not necessary.
>
>I am honest with myself. I, as everyone have limited time. I will not waste my
>time with an archaic system and maintainers who fail to see the light of day
>when there are better ways I can spend my time, example
>
>  http://github.com/stars/svnpenn

It's possible that a site like github has more bandwidth and compute
power than sourceware.org and doesn't have to worry about bogging down
the system with malicious search attacks.  We, unfortunately, do.  So,
while it is possible to turn on searches, it seems like I'd have to
personally take some time to fixing the viewvc code to mitigate any
damage from using searches.  That is more effort than I'm willing to go
to on one person's claim that this functionality is vitally necessary.

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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Steven Penny]

On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> It's possible that a site like github has more bandwidth and compute
> power than sourceware.org and doesn't have to worry about bogging down
> the system with malicious search attacks.  We, unfortunately, do.  So,
> while it is possible to turn on searches, it seems like I'd have to
> personally take some time to fixing the viewvc code to mitigate any
> damage from using searches.  That is more effort than I'm willing to go
> to on one person's claim that this functionality is vitally necessary.

You dont want to take the time to fix it? You want to maintain the status quo?
Thats cool. But then dont go complaining on the mailing list when you are
unwilling to take steps to fix it.

I promise you complaining is going to do nothing other than make you feel better
(temporarily).

--
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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 12:43:25PM -0500, Steven Penny wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>It's possible that a site like github has more bandwidth and compute
>>power than sourceware.org and doesn't have to worry about bogging down
>>the system with malicious search attacks.  We, unfortunately, do.  So,
>>while it is possible to turn on searches, it seems like I'd have to
>>personally take some time to fixing the viewvc code to mitigate any
>>damage from using searches.  That is more effort than I'm willing to go
>>to on one person's claim that this functionality is vitally necessary.
>
>You dont want to take the time to fix it?  You want to maintain the
>status quo?  Thats cool.  But then dont go complaining on the mailing
>list when you are unwilling to take steps to fix it.

Any fix to viewvc was likely to be non-trivial.  It would require making
changes to unfamiliar code and, since we've had a lot of attacks on
sourceware.org over the years, I was leery about introducing another
vector.  So, given that you are a data point of one, it didn't seem
worth my time do spend a lot of time on this, despite your indulgenge in
the de rigeur internet style of claiming that your opinions are fact.

The good news is that when we eventually switch Cygwin to git we'll get
search functionality for free so it really is more worth my time to make
that switch than it is to investigate changing viewvc.  I'll try to get
to that in the next week or so.  I know that Corinna will be thrilled to
finally be on git.

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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Andrey Repin]

Greetings, Steven Penny!

> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Warren Young wrote:
>> If you think web code repository searching and a public bug tracker are
>> primary barriers to contribution, you aren't being honest with yourself.
>> They are nice, but not necessary.

> I am honest with myself. I, as everyone have limited time.

Seems like the limit on your time is very laxed.
For the time you wrote all the posts to this list, I've downloaded whole
Cygwin /cvs/src, found the offended string, patched the file, and it took me 2
days to rebuild it only because I wasn't familiar with out-of-the tree build
system. (Had to read building instructions first, yeah...)
Now, I'm a happy owner of a custom cygpath that doesn't annoy me with
insignificant warnings.

> I will not waste my time with an archaic system and maintainers who fail to
> see the light of day when there are better ways I can spend my time,

If all the point you want to make is that YOU don't want to spend time
supporting the toolset you're using daily, please save your energy.
My Care-o-meter shows negative readings.


--
WBR,
Andrey Repin (anrdaemon@yandex.ru) 10.04.2014, <05:52>

Sorry for my terrible english...


--
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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Corinna Vinschen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1154 bytes --]

On Apr 10 05:58, Andrey Repin wrote:
> Greetings, Steven Penny!
> 
> > On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Warren Young wrote:
> >> If you think web code repository searching and a public bug tracker are
> >> primary barriers to contribution, you aren't being honest with yourself.
> >> They are nice, but not necessary.
> 
> > I am honest with myself. I, as everyone have limited time.
> 
> Seems like the limit on your time is very laxed.
> For the time you wrote all the posts to this list, I've downloaded whole
> Cygwin /cvs/src, found the offended string, patched the file, and it took me 2
> days to rebuild it only because I wasn't familiar with out-of-the tree build
> system. (Had to read building instructions first, yeah...)
> Now, I'm a happy owner of a custom cygpath that doesn't annoy me with
> insignificant warnings.

Wanna send the patch to cygwin-patches(*)?


Corinna

(*) I vaguely recall some discussion about cygpath warnings but I
    forgot the details...

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Steven Penny]

On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 8:58 PM, Andrey Repin wrote:
> If all the point you want to make is that YOU don't want to spend time
> supporting the toolset you're using daily, please save your energy.
> My Care-o-meter shows negative readings.

Hey buddy, if you want to spend your days with ad hominem attacks that is your
business. The point of my emails was not my contributions, but Christopher's
complaining.

--
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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Chris J. Breisch]

Steven Penny wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 8:58 PM, Andrey Repin wrote:
>
> Hey buddy, if you want to spend your days with ad hominem attacks that is your
> business. The point of my emails was not my contributions, but Christopher's
> complaining.
>

You know, I've read this whole thread. There's only been one person 
complaining in it and it's not cgf.

I admit that Christopher can be gruff at times. And I think that 
sometimes he has a bit of an attitude. But, honestly I don't blame him 
for that. Look at it from his perspective.

80% of the requests for assistance here are answered by one of two 
people. And this isn't their day job.

Not only that, most of these requests would be unnecessary if people 
bothered to do a little research before asking.

Most of the ones that don't fall in that category could be much more 
easily resolved if people followed the directions for submitting 
requests for assistance.

So, of course, cgf gets a little frustrated at times. He's answering the 
same questions over and over, and repeating the same requests for 
additional information over and over.

Then, on top of that, we get people who seem to expect paid for quality 
support and maintenance for something that's free and from those who are 
submitting their time for free.

Maybe you should just chill a bit, and before you start again with the 
holier-than-thou stuff, take some time to look at things from the other 
perspective.

Those who are in control of the project have admitted that CVS is 
limiting, and have it on their radar to update it and replace it. When 
will that happen? I don't know. Real Soon Now, I'm sure. But I'm sure 
it's not a trivial 10-minute job, and I bet a rather significant 
percentage of the time that Christopher can devote towards Cygwin in a 
given day is wasted dealing with the issues mentioned above.

Be patient. I've been using Cygwin since...well since before it was 
called Cygwin. I think even before it was called Cygwin32. It's come a 
long way, and in that time many people have managed to contribute 
patches. Will more do so when CVS is replaced? Maybe, but I imagine it 
will still mostly be the same people.

Give these people a break and realize the amount of effort they've put 
into this, and stop complaining yourself.

Oh, and as far as source control systems go, and submitting patches, I 
remember using RCS, and before that SCCS. Those worked fine for their 
time, and I submitted lots of patches using them, even one that made it 
into the BDS 4.3 Tahoe 'vi' code.

So, like Andy, pardon me if I'm not moved to tears by your difficulties 
submitting patches.

-- 
Chris J. Breisch

--
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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Peter Rosin]

On 2014-04-09 19:05, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> And, this gives me the opportunity to say a belated thank-you to you and
> other people who have managed, despite all odds, to contribute.
> 
> Here's a knocked together list from the last 13-or-so years of Cygwin.

*snip*

> Apologies if I missed anyone.

Apology accepted. The reason I'm not contributing more is the requirement
to assign copyright to a for-profit organization. Sorry.

Cheers,
Peter


--
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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Steven Penny]

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Chris J. Breisch wrote:
> I admit that Christopher can be gruff at times. And I think that sometimes
> he has a bit of an attitude. But, honestly I don't blame him for that. Look
> at it from his perspective.

Christopher Faylor is an invaluable part of this project, but his complaining
about lack of developers adds no value.

> Those who are in control of the project have admitted that CVS is limiting,
> and have it on their radar to update it and replace it. When will that
> happen? I don't know. Real Soon Now, I'm sure. But I'm sure it's not a
> trivial 10-minute job, and I bet a rather significant percentage of the time
> that Christopher can devote towards Cygwin in a given day is wasted dealing
> with the issues mentioned above.

If you do what you have always done, you will get what you always got.
If Christopher wants to gripe on the mailing that his business, but he and
everyone else need to get realisic about the fact that not everyone is willing
to use a 20 year CVS. People criticize my suggestion as not a guaranteed fix.
Well guess what, nothing is a guaranteed fix for hard problems such as this. How
do you encourage more people to contribute? well you can start by making it
easier for them, which is what I am proposing.

> So, like Andy, pardon me if I'm not moved to tears by your difficulties
> submitting patches.

My difficulties? I dont see your name on this list
http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2014-04/msg00206.html
so perhaps you should get out of that glass house.

--
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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Chris J. Breisch]

Steven Penny wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Chris J. Breisch wrote:

> If you do what you have always done, you will get what you always got.
> If Christopher wants to gripe on the mailing that his business, but he and
> everyone else need to get realisic about the fact that not everyone is willing
> to use a 20 year CVS. People criticize my suggestion as not a guaranteed fix.
> Well guess what, nothing is a guaranteed fix for hard problems such as this. How
> do you encourage more people to contribute? well you can start by making it
> easier for them, which is what I am proposing.

And your proposal has been heard. Also other options have been 
discussed. No one but you is talking about continuing forever with the 
exact same technologies. But none of the options can be accomplished 
with a snap of the finger. And continuing to complain and whine after 
the discussion of what you seem to think is a problem will rarely 
accomplish anything useful. Still, if it makes you feel better, by all 
means continue, but I suspect that this thread is about to be locked 
down, as it does not appear to serve any useful purpose at this point.

>
>> So, like Andy, pardon me if I'm not moved to tears by your difficulties
>> submitting patches.
>
> My difficulties? I dont see your name on this list
> http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2014-04/msg00206.html
> so perhaps you should get out of that glass house.
>

I'm not in a glass house, and I'll throw all the rocks I want, thank you 
very much. I never said I had difficulty submitting a patch. I'm sure it 
would be very easy to do. But my needs are general enough that I rarely 
run into problems that haven't already been discussed here. I think I 
have discovered one problem with file and path handling, but I haven't 
had a chance to check to see if it's my problem or Cygwin's. In fact, it 
may be another incarnation of a problem that's been discussed here a few 
times. However, IF I verify that it is a Cygwin problem, and not mine, 
and not a known one, I will likely use CVS and attempt to track down the 
problem and submit a patch. I'm betting it won't be nearly as hard as 
you seem to think.

So, again, pardon me if I'm not moved to tears by your difficulties.


-- 
Chris J. Breisch

--
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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Steven Penny]

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 7:28 PM, Chris J. Breisch wrote:
>>> So, like Andy, pardon me if I'm not moved to tears by your difficulties
>>> submitting patches.
> So, again, pardon me if I'm not moved to tears by your difficulties.

Oops, sorry folks it looks like I trigged a broken record. Sir, I have made my
suggestion to improve the lack of developers. Did you have anything constructive
to add to the conversation, like your own suggestion? Or did you want to just
keep parroting off the same sentence? Cheers.

--
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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 01:15:12AM +0200, Peter Rosin wrote:
>On 2014-04-09 19:05, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> And, this gives me the opportunity to say a belated thank-you to you and
>> other people who have managed, despite all odds, to contribute.
>> 
>> Here's a knocked together list from the last 13-or-so years of Cygwin.
>
>*snip*
>
>> Apologies if I missed anyone.

Huh.  I see your name right there in the ChangeLog.  I'm not sure how my
sed script missed you.  Sorry.

>Apology accepted. The reason I'm not contributing more is the requirement
>to assign copyright to a for-profit organization. Sorry.

Yeah.  That bothered me a little when I first had to do it and, I have
to admit, it bothered me when I was at Red Hat and it bothers me now
too.  I think you've hit on a real barrier to entry there and since we
now have a dataset of two rather than one we can really claim that we're
right.

I have to ask you have to do something similar with the FSF.  Would that
be an issue for you too?  Probably not since it isn't a for-profit entity.

The other odd thing is that newlib has no requirements for an assignment
and it is an integral part of Cygwin so I have to wonder how Red Hat
reconciles that.

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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 07:39:49PM -0500, Steven Penny wrote:
>On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 7:28 PM, Chris J. Breisch wrote:
>>>> So, like Andy, pardon me if I'm not moved to tears by your difficulties
>>>> submitting patches.
>> So, again, pardon me if I'm not moved to tears by your difficulties.
>
>Oops, sorry folks it looks like I trigged a broken record. Sir, I have made my
>suggestion to improve the lack of developers. Did you have anything constructive
>to add to the conversation, like your own suggestion? Or did you want to just
>keep parroting off the same sentence? Cheers.

Broken record?  Parrotting?  Bwahaha!

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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 07:11:02PM -0500, Steven Penny wrote:
>On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Chris J. Breisch wrote:
>> I admit that Christopher can be gruff at times. And I think that sometimes
>> he has a bit of an attitude. But, honestly I don't blame him for that. Look
>> at it from his perspective.
>
>Christopher Faylor is an invaluable part of this project, but his complaining
>about lack of developers adds no value.

Actually, it was Corinna who first complained about the lack of contributions.

My original contribution to this thread noting that a person who found
the source could provide a patch.  That has nothing to do with "web
repos" since the person had already tracked down the code.

>>So, like Andy, pardon me if I'm not moved to tears by your difficulties
>>submitting patches.
>
>My difficulties?  I dont see your name on this list
>http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2014-04/msg00206.html so perhaps you should
>get out of that glass house.

If lack of contributions to Cygwin precludes someone having an opinion
then, well, gee...

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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Peter Rosin]

On 2014-04-11 04:17, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 01:15:12AM +0200, Peter Rosin wrote:
>> ... The reason I'm not contributing more is the requirement
>> to assign copyright to a for-profit organization. Sorry.
> 
> Yeah.  That bothered me a little when I first had to do it and, I have
> to admit, it bothered me when I was at Red Hat and it bothers me now
> too.  I think you've hit on a real barrier to entry there and since we
> now have a dataset of two rather than one we can really claim that we're
> right.
> 
> I have to ask you have to do something similar with the FSF.  Would that
> be an issue for you too?  Probably not since it isn't a for-profit entity.

Right, FSF was ok with my employer, after a bit of convincing. I have
for example helped making Libtool work better on Cygwin (and Windows
in general). Anything for-profit like Redhat (I did bring it up)
was just too much, and that discussion ended pretty quickly. Anyway,
it's not like I'm sitting on any patches and that lifting that
barrier will open any floodgate from this corner. But that said, I
rarely bother looking at the code since there is no way forward on
committing any results, with my trivial patches quota nearly fully
utilized...

> The other odd thing is that newlib has no requirements for an assignment
> and it is an integral part of Cygwin so I have to wonder how Red Hat
> reconciles that.

The newlib license is liberal enough for RedHat to relicense it under
their own terms?

Cheers,
Peter


--
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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Andrey Repin]

Greetings, Corinna Vinschen!

>> > On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Warren Young wrote:
>> >> If you think web code repository searching and a public bug tracker are
>> >> primary barriers to contribution, you aren't being honest with yourself.
>> >> They are nice, but not necessary.
>> 
>> > I am honest with myself. I, as everyone have limited time.
>> 
>> Seems like the limit on your time is very laxed.
>> For the time you wrote all the posts to this list, I've downloaded whole
>> Cygwin /cvs/src, found the offended string, patched the file, and it took me 2
>> days to rebuild it only because I wasn't familiar with out-of-the tree build
>> system. (Had to read building instructions first, yeah...)
>> Now, I'm a happy owner of a custom cygpath that doesn't annoy me with
>> insignificant warnings.

> Wanna send the patch to cygwin-patches(*)?

I'm not quite happy with it yet. I'll need to dig through that function
another pass to see, if I can completely avoid the code path in question
without harming any hamsters in process.
Besides, when I digged through it, I got an idea of completely new
functionality. That may be the one I want to contribute.


--
WBR,
Andrey Repin (anrdaemon@yandex.ru) 11.04.2014, <15:01>

Sorry for my terrible english...


--
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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Corinna Vinschen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1814 bytes --]

On Apr 11 09:01, Peter Rosin wrote:
> On 2014-04-11 04:17, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 01:15:12AM +0200, Peter Rosin wrote:
> >> ... The reason I'm not contributing more is the requirement
> >> to assign copyright to a for-profit organization. Sorry.
> > 
> > Yeah.  That bothered me a little when I first had to do it and, I have
> > to admit, it bothered me when I was at Red Hat and it bothers me now
> > too.  I think you've hit on a real barrier to entry there and since we
> > now have a dataset of two rather than one we can really claim that we're
> > right.
> > 
> > I have to ask you have to do something similar with the FSF.  Would that
> > be an issue for you too?  Probably not since it isn't a for-profit entity.
> 
> Right, FSF was ok with my employer, after a bit of convincing. I have
> for example helped making Libtool work better on Cygwin (and Windows
> in general). Anything for-profit like Redhat (I did bring it up)
> was just too much, and that discussion ended pretty quickly. Anyway,
> it's not like I'm sitting on any patches and that lifting that
> barrier will open any floodgate from this corner. But that said, I
> rarely bother looking at the code since there is no way forward on
> committing any results, with my trivial patches quota nearly fully
> utilized...
> 
> > The other odd thing is that newlib has no requirements for an assignment
> > and it is an integral part of Cygwin so I have to wonder how Red Hat
> > reconciles that.
> 
> The newlib license is liberal enough for RedHat to relicense it under
> their own terms?

That's it, more or less.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Corinna Vinschen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1893 bytes --]

On Apr 11 15:03, Andrey Repin wrote:
> Greetings, Corinna Vinschen!
> 
> >> > On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Warren Young wrote:
> >> >> If you think web code repository searching and a public bug tracker are
> >> >> primary barriers to contribution, you aren't being honest with yourself.
> >> >> They are nice, but not necessary.
> >> 
> >> > I am honest with myself. I, as everyone have limited time.
> >> 
> >> Seems like the limit on your time is very laxed.
> >> For the time you wrote all the posts to this list, I've downloaded whole
> >> Cygwin /cvs/src, found the offended string, patched the file, and it took me 2
> >> days to rebuild it only because I wasn't familiar with out-of-the tree build
> >> system. (Had to read building instructions first, yeah...)
> >> Now, I'm a happy owner of a custom cygpath that doesn't annoy me with
> >> insignificant warnings.
> 
> > Wanna send the patch to cygwin-patches(*)?
> 
> I'm not quite happy with it yet. I'll need to dig through that function
> another pass to see, if I can completely avoid the code path in question
> without harming any hamsters in process.

I'm *so* glad you're sympathetic with the hamsters.  They have build
their lair inside of cygpath alreasy years ago, so I would not like
to disturb them.

> Besides, when I digged through it, I got an idea of completely new
> functionality. That may be the one I want to contribute.

As for new functionality and non-trivial patches, I'm sorry but we
still need the copyright assignment in this case.  I know that people
are shying away from it, so I hope there still some who don't...

See http://cygwin.com/contrib.html, the "Before you get started" section.


Thanks,
Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 02:10:42PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Apr 11 09:01, Peter Rosin wrote:
>>The newlib license is liberal enough for RedHat to relicense it under
>>their own terms?
>
>That's it, more or less.

I have never seen how you can have it both ways, legally speaking.  I
was told not to worry about it when I was at Red Hat but no one ever
gave me a convincing explanation.  Since there are no assignments in
newlib land, it just relies on BSD-like licensing.  I don't see why
Cygwin can't do the same.

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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Corinna Vinschen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1141 bytes --]

On Apr 11 13:09, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 02:10:42PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Apr 11 09:01, Peter Rosin wrote:
> >>The newlib license is liberal enough for RedHat to relicense it under
> >>their own terms?
> >
> >That's it, more or less.
> 
> I have never seen how you can have it both ways, legally speaking.  I
> was told not to worry about it when I was at Red Hat but no one ever
> gave me a convincing explanation.  Since there are no assignments in
> newlib land, it just relies on BSD-like licensing.  I don't see why
> Cygwin can't do the same.

BTAT in 2011.  IANAL, but the reason is the buyout clause which,
apparently, requires a certain amount of red tape while, incidentally,
funds a non-trivial amount of the time I can spend on Cygwin.

I'm just curious why you never asked the question while you were still
working at Red Hat.  Anyway, I asked again.  Times change so procedures
might change as well.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 04:46:24PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Apr 11 13:09, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 02:10:42PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> >On Apr 11 09:01, Peter Rosin wrote:
>> >>The newlib license is liberal enough for RedHat to relicense it under
>> >>their own terms?
>> >
>> >That's it, more or less.
>> 
>> I have never seen how you can have it both ways, legally speaking.  I
>> was told not to worry about it when I was at Red Hat but no one ever
>> gave me a convincing explanation.  Since there are no assignments in
>> newlib land, it just relies on BSD-like licensing.  I don't see why
>> Cygwin can't do the same.
>
>BTAT in 2011.  IANAL, but the reason is the buyout clause which,
>apparently, requires a certain amount of red tape while, incidentally,
>funds a non-trivial amount of the time I can spend on Cygwin.
>
>I'm just curious why you never asked the question while you were still
>working at Red Hat.  Anyway, I asked again.  Times change so procedures
>might change as well.

"I was told not to worry about it"

[rest of long rant snipped]

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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Andrey Repin]

Greetings, Corinna Vinschen!

>> >> >> If you think web code repository searching and a public bug tracker are
>> >> >> primary barriers to contribution, you aren't being honest with yourself.
>> >> >> They are nice, but not necessary.
>> >> 
>> >> > I am honest with myself. I, as everyone have limited time.
>> >> 
>> >> Seems like the limit on your time is very laxed.
>> >> For the time you wrote all the posts to this list, I've downloaded whole
>> >> Cygwin /cvs/src, found the offended string, patched the file, and it took me 2
>> >> days to rebuild it only because I wasn't familiar with out-of-the tree build
>> >> system. (Had to read building instructions first, yeah...)
>> >> Now, I'm a happy owner of a custom cygpath that doesn't annoy me with
>> >> insignificant warnings.
>> 
>> > Wanna send the patch to cygwin-patches(*)?
>> 
>> I'm not quite happy with it yet. I'll need to dig through that function
>> another pass to see, if I can completely avoid the code path in question
>> without harming any hamsters in process.

> I'm *so* glad you're sympathetic with the hamsters.  They have build
> their lair inside of cygpath alreasy years ago, so I would not like
> to disturb them.

I knew you love them too.

>> Besides, when I digged through it, I got an idea of completely new
>> functionality. That may be the one I want to contribute.

> As for new functionality and non-trivial patches, I'm sorry but we
> still need the copyright assignment in this case.  I know that people
> are shying away from it, so I hope there still some who don't...

> See http://cygwin.com/contrib.html, the "Before you get started" section.

I honestly don't care. I do not understand whole tantrum around
"copyright", "copywrong" and other "copyleft".
What the hell you can do about it? Pick a spoon, crack my head open and drain
it out of my brain?
Whatever I release to the public, I mainly do that under WTF PL.


--
WBR,
Andrey Repin (anrdaemon@yandex.ru) 13.04.2014, <02:41>

Sorry for my terrible english...


--
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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 02:45:06AM +0400, Andrey Repin wrote:
>Greetings, Corinna Vinschen!
>> As for new functionality and non-trivial patches, I'm sorry but we
>> still need the copyright assignment in this case.  I know that people
>> are shying away from it, so I hope there still some who don't...
>
>> See http://cygwin.com/contrib.html, the "Before you get started" section.
>
>I honestly don't care. I do not understand whole tantrum around
>"copyright", "copywrong" and other "copyleft".
>What the hell you can do about it? Pick a spoon, crack my head open and drain
>it out of my brain?
>Whatever I release to the public, I mainly do that under WTF PL.

Don't know if you've looked at the form but the issue usually isn't if you
care.  It's if your employer is ok with your assigning code to another
commercial entity.  Your wishes only really enter into it insofar as if
you wish to donate code at all.  After that, it's up to your employer
to release the code to Red Hat.

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

Re: We need steenking patches (Re: Cygwin kill utility...)

[Corinna Vinschen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2377 bytes --]

On Apr 13 02:45, Andrey Repin wrote:
> Greetings, Corinna Vinschen!
> 
> >> >> >> If you think web code repository searching and a public bug tracker are
> >> >> >> primary barriers to contribution, you aren't being honest with yourself.
> >> >> >> They are nice, but not necessary.
> >> >> 
> >> >> > I am honest with myself. I, as everyone have limited time.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Seems like the limit on your time is very laxed.
> >> >> For the time you wrote all the posts to this list, I've downloaded whole
> >> >> Cygwin /cvs/src, found the offended string, patched the file, and it took me 2
> >> >> days to rebuild it only because I wasn't familiar with out-of-the tree build
> >> >> system. (Had to read building instructions first, yeah...)
> >> >> Now, I'm a happy owner of a custom cygpath that doesn't annoy me with
> >> >> insignificant warnings.
> >> 
> >> > Wanna send the patch to cygwin-patches(*)?
> >> 
> >> I'm not quite happy with it yet. I'll need to dig through that function
> >> another pass to see, if I can completely avoid the code path in question
> >> without harming any hamsters in process.
> 
> > I'm *so* glad you're sympathetic with the hamsters.  They have build
> > their lair inside of cygpath alreasy years ago, so I would not like
> > to disturb them.
> 
> I knew you love them too.
> 
> >> Besides, when I digged through it, I got an idea of completely new
> >> functionality. That may be the one I want to contribute.
> 
> > As for new functionality and non-trivial patches, I'm sorry but we
> > still need the copyright assignment in this case.  I know that people
> > are shying away from it, so I hope there still some who don't...
> 
> > See http://cygwin.com/contrib.html, the "Before you get started" section.
> 
> I honestly don't care. I do not understand whole tantrum around
> "copyright", "copywrong" and other "copyleft".
> What the hell you can do about it? Pick a spoon, crack my head open and drain
> it out of my brain?
> Whatever I release to the public, I mainly do that under WTF PL.

Unfortunately that won't work.  For direct patches to the cygwin DLL
and tools code we need the copyright assignment, sorry.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]