Re: Automake (alpha) release request

[Sebastian Pipping]

Hello Ralf!


First sorry for not replying earlier.

Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Second, wrt. to Automake releases: I would have no problem doing a
> 1.10.1 very soon, using GPLv2+, which however installs the GPLv3
> COPYING file into new packages (automake -a), and which has the lzma
> patch from master.  And yes, FSF-wise there seems to be no problem with
> doing a GPLv2+ release of the autotools, exactly because of this
> licensing holdup.

I think such a release would help, yes.
However if the naming scheme allows this please choose a release
version that is greater than "1.10a" which 1.10.1 would be not, right?
would "1.10b" be an option?



> For 1.11, however, besides the licensing issue it needs work, and this
> is where you could help much more effectively than with a donation:
> somebody needs to test the current code on several systems, and with
> some packages out there.  The vala patches need review, and ideally the 
> mono ones, too; except that AFAIK they still need a copyright
> assignment.

I don't think I can really help this other than using
a post 1.10 Automake where possible. I did this with the latest
release of uriparser to offer a .tar.lzma package:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/uriparser



> The larger issue here is that since Alexandre left, there is basically
> no official Automake maintainer, and I have little time, and it will not
> be more in the near future.  Increasing that time is simply not an
> option for me, and not a function of monetary flow in whatever
> direction.  So what is needed is a new maintainer, or at least somebody
> who can help out.

I'm sorry to say but I'm not the right one for this job.
Maybe I can take a small piece of the cake but I'd
need a real mentor with time.

Best regards,



Sebastian