>>> "RW" == Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...] RW> No problem. Please indicate though which branches some patch should be RW> applied to (I write for HEAD only). That's fine, let's forget the branch, I don't plan to make an 1.9.7 unless something very serious happen. I'd rather focus on releasing 1.10 as soon as Autoconf is out. RW> You regenerate files with CVS Autoconf and with the RW> Automake version that is being checked in, right? Yeah, just don't mention these files in ChangeLog. I usually don't a force full regeneration anytime I change a bit, I just let it happen by make (unless that bit actually has an effect to all Automake's Makefiles, of course -- one reason these files are checked in is to force ourself looking how the real bits changes), but any way is not really a problem. -- Alexandre Duret-Lutz Shared books are happy books. http://www.bookcrossing.com/friend/gadl
