On Mon, 2008-05-05 at 23:38 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote: > On Mon, 2008-05-05 at 23:28 -0400, Casey Dahlin wrote: > > > In light of this, I have a proposal: > > > > We fix our specs to not use autoconf, and remove the old versions as > > stated, but we keep them around, perhaps in another branch in CVS or > > simply removed from the F10 tag. Then we just wait for complaints. If > > someone comes in and says "I was actively using that" we can just slap > > it back in. After one release cycle we can flush the rest. > > > > And we do all this work because we have nothing better to do ? > Whats the gain, again ? Improved portability of your packages, improved robustness of your configury and much simpler Makefiles (wrt. automake). That's the core points the autotools are after and upstreams should be after - Of cause, these aspects are not of much importance if your target audience is Linux-only. Ralf -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
