[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Automake (alpha) release request

From: Sebastian Pipping
Subject: Re: Automake (alpha) release request
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 00:56:46 +0100
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20071031)

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

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:

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,


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]