Can we go together and convince the stubborn Cygwin-devs to PLEASE integrate this into mainline? I've tried a couple of times to convince them that we need something like apt-cyg, and lots of people keep trying, but they just won't budge.
Like 10 years ago, I was poking them at the idea of having some command line support for package installation instead of having to go through the brittle setup.exe to install/update packages... You can make an educated guess at the answer to anything related to non-retarded package management.
Cygwin is a great tool. I've used it for 15 years.
Its installer has always been ... lacking.
The example of non-broken installers, in the form of RPM (from Red Hat, with which Cygwin is now associated), or APT (from Debian, even non-broken than RPM) has been around since, oh, 1994 or so (apt really came into its own a few years later, but since 1997/98 it's been a pretty amazing tool).
The development of apt-cyg has already been done.
A key element of managing any project is to be responsive to constructive criticism, and accepting of outside ideas. Especially excellent, long-desired, well-constructed ideas instantiated in code.
I'm taking statements here at face value, but if the response of the Cygwin team has been "thanks, but no, your 'good' isn't our 'perfect'", then they're 1) being butt-retarded and 2) reiterating one of the classic blunders.
Fortunately I don't particularly care, as I've made pretty clear in this thread, my need and use of Cygwin is pretty minimal these days, though on the very rare occasions I find called on to use it, yes, I appreciate it.
Raising devs beyond criticism, BTW, is yet another classic blunder. It's one the GNOME team have been perpetrating for over a decade now -- tech-savvy users aren't it's "target userbase", and non-tech users are, by definition, "unqualified to comment on code". So they've derived by circular logic that those qualified to comment cannot comment relevantly, and those who can comment relevantly aren't qualified to comment.
The project's malaise over the past few years has hardly been a surprise to me.
I'm not saying Cygwin are falling quite so hard into precisely the same trap, but they're clearly making an error here, as are you in dismissing criticism.
I'm not raising the cygwin devs beyond criticism. I don't even think they themselves do this, at least not in the way that you describe gnome (which is a point well taken). I think that this small handful of smart developers are more influenced by their own personality than a larger more inclusive group might be, and their interaction, as I have observed in their response to requests and criticism, is somewhat abrasive. "Curt."
I don't worry about it, because I can't play in their sphere. I'm happy to have it, like I'm happy to have gravity, and I can't change or influence either one.
The installer actually has improved incrementally over the years. apt-cyg would be nice, but it's reasonable for them to triage it off the list of things to do, since anyone who cares can install it themselves.
I'm one of the cygwin developers. Please feel free to discuss the inclusion of a new package in the cygwin mailing list. If there is an active maintainer for the package and the package works as advertised, then it is possible that it would be voted in.
It would be inordinately useful if you could refrain from name calling during any discussion.
