On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 03:20:26AM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > Of course we could do that. > > However, it's entirely against the first principal of httpd, > which is that this project builds against more old and crufty > operating systems installs than most utilities, sans 'cat' :) > > Seriously, we could target only latest-n-greatest, but that > goes against the grain of many participants.
I think we should be much stricter for the releases we make and rather leninent at buildconf-time. I think Joe's proposed bumping up to a mandatory autoconf 2.5x (for everyone) because we keep getting nailed on autoconf 2.13 bugs. That's goodness. And, I think we should enforce libtool 1.5.10 for any future release that we produce (i.e. in httpd-dist/tools/releasecheck.sh). If a developer has anything above libtool 1.3, it'll work (for some definition of 'work') - but they're on their own if they run into problems. Of course, if we posted 2.1.2 as a 'public' beta, then we could start to get feedback if the ac2.59/lt1.5.10 combo breaks anyone. =) -- justin
