This is the mail archive of the
automake@gnu.org
mailing list for the automake project.
Re: Automake 1.6d available (beta for Automake 1.7)
- From: Akim Demaille <akim at epita dot fr>
- To: Bruce Korb <bkorb at pacbell dot net>
- Cc: Alexandre Duret-Lutz <duret_g at lrde dot epita dot fr>, Automake Development <automake at gnu dot org>, AutoConf Development <autoconf at gnu dot org>, Libtool Development <libtool at gnu dot org>
- Date: 24 Sep 2002 13:38:36 +0200
- Subject: Re: Automake 1.6d available (beta for Automake 1.7)
- References: <2002-09-18-23-23-59+4619+duret_g@lrde.epita.fr><3D88F2EE.1A79D4B7@pacbell.net><2002-09-22-19-30-31+19131+duret_g@lrde.epita.fr><3D8E2793.BA43A20E@pacbell.net><2002-09-22-22-28-20+23956+duret_g@lrde.epita.fr><3D8E364D.B7F63B26@pacbell.net>
| Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
| > Bruce> My preference would be this:
| >
| > Could you send this to the list?
|
| Alright:
|
| I would really like to see the auto* tools packages (autoconf,
| automake and libtool) each adopt several of their worst
| clients' packages for regression testing.
It's already the case, as you just proved.
I appreciate very much your suggestions, but I have another: run the
betas. Once there will be enough people running the betas, there will
probably be less bugs released. As of today, I run CVS Autoconf
etc. on a large set of packages, including the very demanding
Coreutils. Plus I send announcements for betas. After this, I feel
in peace with myself when I release.