Petr Rockai <[email protected]> writes: >> I'm happy to switch the defaults, but I think it would be prudent to >> keep the autoconf stuff up to date for at one more release, if not two. >> Carefully, carefully. It may slow us down, but I think it pays off.
My expectation is that 2.3's autoconf support will be like 2.2's cabal support: it mostly works, and we aren't deliberately disabling it, but it's not the official "blessed" build method. In 2.4 or 2.5, we disable and remove autoconf entirely. > Well, pays or not, the question is whether we have the manpower to > throw at it. I am certainly not that manpower -- if Trent volunteers > to fixing up autoconf, I won't be opposed, although I'm sure there are > many more useful ways for his darcs time to be spent. I'll fix things that are release-critical or critical, but I've no interest in fixing minor bugs in the autoconf infrastructure. I've WONTFIXed some bugs in the BTS today for that reason. > Without moving our infrastructure [...] there are no bots to verify > that our build system works, et cetera. [...] Let's just switch to > Cabal now, fix up the damage this does and then, if someone finds the > time in the following 4 or 5 months, fixes up autoconf. +1 to this approach. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
