Sounds good to me.
We could start by reviewers keeping an eye out for changes in version,
when reviewing fixes requiring updates to generated-configure.
-Chris.
On 28/08/2013 00:43, Mike Duigou wrote:
A possible policy that would also gently (glacially?) roll the autoconf version forward over time
might be to say "If you can, use the same version of autoconf used for the prior
generated-configure you are replacing. If this is impractical use your system's default
version.". This seems like the most practical possible softening of a hard "Use autoconf
2.XX".
Mike
On Aug 27 2013, at 01:55 , Chris Hegarty wrote:
...
I'm guilty of submitting with all three versions, depending on if I'm
working on Ubuntu, Solaris, Windows or Mac. I too find it convenient
when the versions match and if we decided on a specific version, I would
just install that one from source on the machines I'm using. The build
of autoconf takes a couple of seconds and has so far never failed for
me, so it's not unreasonable or hard.
Right that is my understanding too. I have a single machine that I use for
regenerating the generated-configure, and I will simply setup whatever version
is required.
I don't think we need a hard mandate, just a softer agreement to use a specific
version, to minimize noise. If someone cannot use that version, then so be it,
but if possible then it should be encouraged.
-Chris.
