From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Faylor To: Jim Kingdon Cc: tromey@cygnus.com, overseers@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: cygwin-xfree Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 06:08:00 -0000 Message-id: <20000504104843.A14875@cygnus.com> References: <20000503221805.A13179@cygnus.com> <200005040259.TAA07015@ferrule.cygnus.com> <20000503230655.B13804@cygnus.com> <200005040309.UAA14692@ferrule.cygnus.com> <20000503232221.D13804@cygnus.com> <200005041152.HAA17664@devserv.devel.redhat.com> X-SW-Source: 2000/msg00466.html On Thu, May 04, 2000 at 07:52:02AM -0400, Jim Kingdon wrote: >As for cygwin-xfree, I'm still looking for objections to suggesting >they go to sourceforge. One of the requirements for being on >kingdon-rules.redhat.com, er, sourceware.cygnus.com, is a sponsor >within Red Hat and in the XFree case we only seem to have one partial >reluctant one (Chris). It's different than Cygwin itself as nearly as >I can tell. I didn't mean to portray reluctance. I *am* really interested in having this on sourceware. I just wanted to make sure that everyone realized that I was not going to stomp my feet if the consensus was that sourceware should not host this. I probably went a little too much in the other direction when I mentioned Source Forge. cgf From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Faylor To: Jim Kingdon Cc: tromey@cygnus.com, overseers@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: cygwin-xfree Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 07:48:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20000504104843.A14875@cygnus.com> References: <20000503221805.A13179@cygnus.com> <200005040259.TAA07015@ferrule.cygnus.com> <20000503230655.B13804@cygnus.com> <200005040309.UAA14692@ferrule.cygnus.com> <20000503232221.D13804@cygnus.com> <200005041152.HAA17664@devserv.devel.redhat.com> X-SW-Source: 2000-q2/msg00159.html Message-ID: <20000504074800.mK00CGz2OHQklQPEQipJaJ2IvbvO08BwtLOh8e9f8zE@z> On Thu, May 04, 2000 at 07:52:02AM -0400, Jim Kingdon wrote: >As for cygwin-xfree, I'm still looking for objections to suggesting >they go to sourceforge. One of the requirements for being on >kingdon-rules.redhat.com, er, sourceware.cygnus.com, is a sponsor >within Red Hat and in the XFree case we only seem to have one partial >reluctant one (Chris). It's different than Cygwin itself as nearly as >I can tell. I didn't mean to portray reluctance. I *am* really interested in having this on sourceware. I just wanted to make sure that everyone realized that I was not going to stomp my feet if the consensus was that sourceware should not host this. I probably went a little too much in the other direction when I mentioned Source Forge. cgf