Re: A Closer Look at GNU AutoTools

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

 



On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 17:52:58 -0700
Paul Eggert <eggert@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I expect them to make constructive and specific suggestions, which
> have been in short supply in this thread but which have occurred in
> the past and, I hope, the future.
> 

I have made suggestions; they've been ignored.

> It's not like there is an army of well-paid developers to maintain
> this stuff.  It's only a thin time-slice of a small number of
> volunteers, all of who have more-important things to do.  If you make
> specific and clear suggestions for improvements, the manuals will
> likely get improved.  If you merely kvetch, you'll likely just waste
> your time and ours.  It's not an ideal situation, but that's life.

Is that an official policy? "Be condescending to complainers so that
they will shut up and go away." No wonder people prefer CMake.


-- 
Don't stop where the ink does.
	Shawn

_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
Autoconf@xxxxxxx
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf




[Index of Archives]     [GCC Help]     [Kernel Discussion]     [RPM Discussion]     [Red Hat Development]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux USB]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux