Re: Proposal for fixing automake (was Re: State of automake packages)
Eric Dorland <email@example.com> writes
> What do people think? If there's no serious objections, I'll upload
> automake1.6 and start fixing 1.4 and 1.5 once its uploaded.
If feasible, my preference would be that the package "automake"
contains the latest version (i.e. 1.6). The older version could be
stuck in "automake1.4", if need be. [I wonder whether 1.5 is even
needed at this point.]
The reason that it is the other way around was mainly to avoid lots of
breakage during the woody freeze. Since woody is now frozen, we ought
to be able to reverse the practice now.
> Kevin (the current automake maintainer) seems unresponsive. Should I
> NMU them for now, or actually take them over?
You might want to give Kevin a reasonable amount of time to respond.
But it would be really nice to have automake maintained in a timely
fashion, whoever does it.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com