[Top][All Lists]

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

RE: CVS branch-2-0 R.I.P.

From: Peter Ekberg
Subject: RE: CVS branch-2-0 R.I.P.
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 16:06:05 +0200

Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 14:10
> To: Libtool
> Subject: CVS branch-2-0 R.I.P.
> Fellow Libtoolers (if you're reading, that means you!),
> I still have reservations, but am otherwise somewhat convinced that
> dropping development of branch-2-0 in favour of HEAD is a reasonable  
> thing
> to do at this juncture.  Unless someone yells to the contrary 
> real soon
> now, I see no reason to continue to maintain branch-2-0 from 
> here on in.
> In due course, I think it is fine to release 2.0 from HEAD (or a new
> release branch from future trunk HEAD to be precise) even with known
> minor bugs, provided that we list them in the release 
> announcement.  In
> order to speed the release, and in the spirit  of "release early,  
> release
> often", I say we identify the actual showstoppers, and 
> release 1.9h from
> HEAD with just those fixed.  There is a list of showstoppers 
> on my wiki
> at
> If 1.9h is well received, I believe we should release 2.0 soon after
> (minor bugs and all), and then work on the remaining regressions for a
> quick 2.0.2.  In order to prevent any further slippage, until 2.0.2 is
> out there we should reject all patches, and commit changes only for:
>   - bugs
>   - regressions
>   - documentation
>   - testsuite improvements
>   - and maybe MSVC support, iff we can confine changes to this system.
> Speak now, or forever hold your peace.

What is the requirements on the autotools for a libtoolized
package from HEAD? I heard a rumor that cvs versions were
required, at least at some point, is that really the case
or was it just a rumor?

I can personally live with that the person doing the actual
libtoolize needs cvs-autotools, but the rest of the
developers on the package should not be required to use


reply via email to

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