Hi Simon,
> > Now that Autoconf 2.73 has been released, it should be possible for every
> > developer to installed Autoconf 2.73 and gettext 1.0 from source, right?
>
> It is not only about developers, is it? It is also about users who
> build packages from git.
Correct.
On the other hand, it's only the packages that use the module 'gettext':
cvs
dc3dd
gmediaserver
hello
icoutils
jwhois
libiconv
licenseutils
mailutils
myserver
nagios-plugins
radius
time
wdiff
> The supported build environments for my
> projects normally include Debian stable, Ubuntu LTS, most recent Fedora,
> RHEL 9+10, Guix and sometimes macOS and Windows (through msys2).
That's why
1) we distribute source tarballs of all releases, that include the
'configure' script,
2) there are different sets of build dependencies for tarballs (typically
listed in the files INSTALL + DEPENDENCIES) and for checkouts from git
(typically listed in the file HACKING).
IMO, it is a bad move to encourage random non-developers to use the git
checkout, as opposed to the tarball, because it leads to
- frustration on the side of that user,
- pointless support questions on the package's mailing list.
> If there is a requirement for autoconf 2.73 and gettext 1.0, that would
> severaly limit the set of supported platforms (maybe even to the empty
> set?), wouldn't it?
I'm not talking about the set of platforms which have autoconf 2.73 and
gettext 1.0 _preinstalled_. (As you point out w.r.t. Debian stable, Ubuntu
LTS, and others, it can take 4 or 5 years until these platforms have it.)
I'm talking about letting the developers know that, for specific packages,
their HACKING file should mention autoconf 2.73 and gettext 1.0.
Bruno
