From: Sebastian S. <ssc...@gm...> - 2013-09-17 08:27:28
|
On 16.09.2013 23:43, Keith Marshall wrote: >> My real point is that I'm a little bit disappointed that the MinGW >> project is promoting mgwport as the "revolutionary new method for >> building and maintaining packages for the MinGW/MSYS offerings" [1], > > In what way, exactly, can a reference on gitorious.org, which has > absolutely no affinity whatsoever for MinGW.org, be construed as > MinGW.org (the official home of the MinGW Project) promoting this? Well, [1] mentions mgwport and links to [2]. So there's your affinity. And the statement "revolutionary new method for building and maintaining packages" can easily create the impression that using mgwport is the favorable way to build packages now. > I sympathize; you have been misled. Had you researched the MinGW-dvlpr > archives, you might have noted my fundamental objections to mgwport. I'm having a hard time finding that discussion. Could you please provide a link for reference? [1] http://www.mingw.org/wiki/mgwport [2] https://gitorious.org/mgwport/mgwport/source/98324ce183c0922124ef09a9c481ed30d03456ad:README -- Sebastian Schuberth |