On Mon, May 2, 2022, at 2:30 AM, Paul Eggert wrote: > On 5/1/22 19:06, Alex Ameen wrote: >> Whoever is most >> actively working on M4sh would be an incredibly useful contact for me, so >> if "that's you" let me know. > > To be honest right now I think "that's you" is the correct answer. As > in, you're the one. I concur. Right now it seems like nobody is actively working on anything in Autoconf, so if you've got patches that makes you the most active contributor. I am probably the person who most recently _worked_ on m4sh and I would be happy to review the patches you have. > If these are extensions to m4sh (as opposed to changes) and would be > useful outside libtool it sounds like Autoconf would be a good home for > them, whatever they are. The trickiest thing here is probably going to be release management. I certainly wouldn't mind turning the crank on an autoconf 2.72 that just had the m4sh improvements + whatever other patches have been committed since 2.71, if that would make your life easier; however, presumably you don't want to make libtool N+1 _require_ the hypothetical autoconf 2.72, so you will need to carry the improvements yourself for a while, and we'll have to coordinate changes between both copies. zw
