On 06/21/2008 02:57 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
I hope my answer considered this enough :-).
BTW: Thanks for taking care of the issue.
No trouble. Consider this, the flavor of autoconf the RM chooses,
unlike all of our backport votes, has no scrutiny beyond the test
of the tarball (hardly even CTR).
Correct.
But if you like I will add a STATUS entry for scrutiny of the last
set of configure.in / build/*.m4 patches corresponding to branches/2.2.
Or a +1 is on list is identical.
No need for these. But I would like to see this in the future.
BTW: I am +1 on the backports.
Regards
Rüdiger
