[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: FESCo Proposal for blocking older version of autoconf & automake

Jesse Keating wrote:
On Mon, 2008-05-05 at 23:43 -0400, Casey Dahlin wrote:
The gain is we decide what to keep and what not to keep based on who actually is willing to fight to keep it around rather than whoever feels like complaining on devel list. Its a corollary to "its easier to apologize than to ask permission," the people who notice the change are a tiny and far more important subset than the people who will complain ahead of time.

It doesn't account for the developers who will have failures, notice we
don't package a version of autoconf anymore and say "Screw that" and
move to some other development platform which does support what they

My $.02 worth of thoughts:

One could imagine a policy in which new packages using these tools would not be accepted per-se, while the tools would still be available, packaged, for those other packages and developers that need it.

Does such, or something similar, make sense?

Kind regards,

Jeroen van Meeuwen

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]