From: Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 17:42:58 -0500
Depends on the problem. For example, the recent library name changes
relating to libltdl/dlopen issues may or may not belong in HEAD, but
they're critical for 1.6.
the recent changes may or may not belong in HEAD but the questions i'm
asking are: (1) what *does* belong in HEAD?
(2) how does the 1.6 library handling relate to (1)?
Since it's very likely we'll choose a different long-term solution
for this problem, and we won't know until we have the discussion, in
my judgement there was little point in trying to integrate the
changes into HEAD right now.
of course these things follow. i'm not questioning the consequence of
the approach, but the wisdom of using that approach in the first place,
which seems backwards and make-work-ful to me.
thi
_______________________________________________
Bug-guile mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guile
