Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-02-01 22:56: > On 02/01/2012 10:33 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: >> Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-02-01 22:31: >>> On 02/01/2012 09:31 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >>>> On 02/01/2012 03:59 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: >>>>> When AM_PROG_CC_C_O is after AC_OUTPUT, the compile script >>>>> is not used even if needed, causing testsuite fails if >>>>> libtool is not used. >>>>> >>>>> * tests/depcomp8a.test: Uncomment the AM_PROG_CC_C_O macro >>>>> in its correct location, as indicated... >>>>> (configure.in): ...with this comment. >>>>> * tests/depcomp8b.test: Sync with tests/depcomp8a.test. >>>>> >>>> ACK. >>>> >>> Wait. On a second thought, wait to push until I've complete >>> the unification between 'maint' and 'branch-1.11', OK? >>> >>> Thanks, and sorry for the confusion, >> >> Too late. Sorry. >> > No problem luckily. I hadn't really started the merge yet (I > had only written the commit message, which is below in case > you care to review it ;-) yet, so I'll just update my repo > before proceeding. > > Thanks for the patience, > Stefano > > -*-*- > > Merge branch 'branch-1.11' into maint > > Keeping the 'branch-1.11' and 'maint' branches separated has become > quite labour-intensive, and already caused too much confusion due > to the entailed divergences (w.r.t. code for MSVC support) between > the branches 'maint', 'master', 'branch-1.11' and 'msvc'. > > So we proceed to merge branch-1.11 into maint, and get rid of > the msvc branch (since that was already routinely merged into > branch-1.11). This move shouldn't cause any regression in the > stability of maint, as branch-1.11 was where we cut our maintenance > releases from -- so it actually was even stabler and better tested > than maint was. > > The only downside of this "unification" between branch-1.11 and > maint will be an increased likelihood of merge conflicts taking > place when we merge maint back into master. But this can only > happen in two scenarios: > > - right after an update to the Automake version number in > 'configure.ac' (which only happens when we cut a release > from maint, so definitely not often); and > > - when we implement a *new* feature in both maint and master, but > with the version in the two branches having slightly different > behaviour between the; this has already happened, but only very
s/the;/them;/ > seldom, and it's clear that it can only happen very seldom if a > sane development process is maintained. > > Another source of conflicts is the NEWS file. How will that fare with the unification of maint and branch-1.11? Cheers, Peter
