[+cc automake-ng] On 02/01/2013 09:45 AM, Peter Rosin wrote: > Hi! > > From NEWS in the master branch: > > - Support for the long-obsolete $(INCLUDES) variable has > been finally removed, in favour of the modern equivalent > $(AM_CPPFLAGS). > > Why is this removal important? It forces changes to a hundred > (or so) Makefiles in *one* project I'm involved with. The fact > that AM_CPPFLAGS is AC_SUBSTed by the project and used mostly > for "global" flags and INCLUDES mostly for "local" stuff makes > for a pretty useful separation. But in quite a few of those > Makefiles, AM_CPPFLAGS (as AC_SUBSTed by configure) is augmented > via "AM_CPPFLAGS +=" constructs. I'm not at all confident that > I will be able to convert all of these uses without errors due > to switched include ordering or omissions or whatever. > Actually, while recently re-reading some of the "aggressive" changes of last, I have come to realize the same thing. Since the removal of INCLUDES is only implemented in master, I saw no hurry in reverting it though; but reconsidering it was on the radar. Bottom line: a patch in that direction would be welcome, especially if its commit message condenses the rationales you have given here.
> [SNIP] good rationales > Also, this quote from commit message removing INCLUDES support: > > "So, by removing it in Automake 1.14, we will simplify > the transition path for people that want to switch to > Automake-NG." > > is just brain-damage and completely ass-backwards, if you ask me. > Damnit, if there is a goal to make it easy to switch, that should > be the sole responsibility of Automake-NG. Especially for trivial > stuff like this. Period. > I'm not happy to say this, but I must admit I agree with you now. This wrong approach is probably the result of me trying to keep a foot in both camps -- that is, maintaining mainline Automake while trying to encourage a switch to Automake-NG in the long term. Probably not a good move, for any of those projects. I should at this point decide whether just devote my "Automake time" to mainline Automake (which amounts at letting Automake-NG die, basically) or to Automake-NG (after tying some loose ends in the mainline Automake code base, of course). So, is anyone using or playing with Automake-NG, or at least contemplating the idea to do so in the short term? Or should we just let the project die? > [SNIP] Regards, Stefano