From: Keith M. <kei...@us...> - 2013-03-14 16:57:05
|
On 14 March 2013 15:55, Earnie Boyd wrote: > Keith does my retort satisfy your concerns? > I still have some; in particular, I still think it is a really bad idea to have two packages, with differing names as you propose, which deliver (at least a subset of) identically named files. (FWIW, and just like you, apparently, I was not of this conviction initially, but Chuck convinced me; as I have progressed the development of mingw-get, my conviction has increased). Meanwhile, I have been exploring my own proposed alternative method of delivery. It also works well, and it has the benefit of avoiding the issue of overlapping package content, entirely. I know you're itching to get a candidate out, but I'll need to get back to you; I'll aim to do that by end of play tomorrow. -- Regards, Keith. |