Re: Future plans for Autotools

[Dan Kegel]

(Removing automake as the original message said "Followup discussion
should go to the Autoconf mailing list.")

I agree that consolidating support for the current architecture and
use cases is the place to start.

The number one screaming priority would seem to be adding continuous
integration.
https://www.gnu.org/software/devel.en.html suggests that the preferred system
is Hydra.

New developers would almost certainly prefer gitlab or github as a
hosting/CI system
as opposed to Savanna + Hydra, but staying 100% free is a big gnu goal, so
it's worth trying Hydra first...?
- Dan

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 4:07 PM Andy Tai <atai@atai.org> wrote:
>
> It seems better not to start another language.  with already lack of
> resources, that will further dilate available resources, and hard to
> compete with other tools already us9ng Python's mature ecosystem
>
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 3:32 PM Bob Friesenhahn <
> bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us> wrote:
>
> >
> > In my opinion, a new "language" designed specifically to meet the
> > needs of Autoconf should be developed and Autoconf should be
> > re-implemented using it.  There should be no more need to run external
> > utilities like 'sed', or 'awk' or other things which can be
> > implemented internally in a way which does not suffer from the white
> > space and delimiter issues that shell script does.
> > --
> > Bob Friesenhahn
> >
>