Re: autoconf 2.52

[Akim Demaille]

>>>>> "Andreas" == Andreas Buening <address@hidden> writes:

Andreas> Hello!  

Hi!

Please, don't write to people personally (but I understand why you did).

Andreas> I've seen that you've updated autoconf. I'd like to know why
Andreas> you haven't applied the two patches I've suggested to get
Andreas> autoconf running on OS/2 (using "$as_ln_s" instead of "ln -s"
Andreas> and the $as_executable_extensions patch).  

Because I didn't have time to evaluate all that meant to get into
2.52.  Sometimes we have to be severe and reject perfectly valid
proposals, just because it takes time to check them.

In addition, no harm meant but..., OS/2 is not a requirement for
Autoconf.

Andreas> Have you forgotten it, haven't you had enough time for it,
Andreas> have you decided not to implement it or have you (or other
Andreas> people) been discussing it for the last months, but without a
Andreas> final decision?  I'd really like to know the reason.

Long debates before reaching a decision are indeed a good means to
have us delay the issues :)