Alexandre Oliva writes:
> On Jun 22, 2000, Lars Hecking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > This is highly confusing, and should be rephrased
>
> It doesn't make much sense to rephrase it now that we have a
> completely different dependency tracking mechanism :-)
A different mechanism maybe, but this should documented somewhere ...
On a personal note, I want to add that the release cycle for
both autoconf and automake is entirely too long. The latest
official releases are from January 1999.
"Release Early, Release often."
The longer the wait, the more people jump the ship and implement their own
solutions outside the auto* framework. The longer the wait, more people
are switching to intermediate cvs versions, causing interoperability
problems with release versions.
Why was it not possible to release bugfix versions of both tools
before putting in all this new stuff (>5000 lines added in autoconf
ChangeLog since Jan 1999), to get at least the glaring errors out
of the way?
Will the new features and incompatibilites be documented properly,
in a document separate from the manual?
