On Wed, 9 Oct 2002, Guido Draheim wrote: > > In my experience, the 1.5 code-base is a solid product on systems > > supported by 1.4.2, and provided that it is patched and proven to work > > under MinGW and Darwin then 1.5 should be ready to release. > > > > That's another argument. And since it was missed to push 1.4.3 out > to the world when it was due, we can as well dump the work that > I and others have done on the libtool-1-4 branch and well move > ahead. Anyway, it would be nice if you'd find some nice words for > those who were not on your branch of the developments, for which > I understand you are proud of what you've achieved and that you > want to have it out and recognized.
I do not mean to slight the supporters of a 1.4.3 release at all. I believe that supporters of a 1.4.3 release have only the best intentions and that many libtool users (but not libtool itself) would benefit from a 1.4.3 release. To clarify things, until very recently I have served only the role of a libtool user, not a libtool developer. While I have used the libtool code which would become 1.5 through its entire development, I have contributed little to it. The gestation period for 1.5 spans well over two years because for quite a long time it lived in the multi-language-branch. Developers like Ossama Othman, Robert Boehne, and Gary Vaughan deserve credit for this work. Bob ====================================== Bob Friesenhahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen _______________________________________________ Libtool mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
