On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 10:35:12PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote: > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 07:54:58PM +0000, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > > As others have said, configure already supports both 2.x and 3.x. The > > remaining question is just whether release.py should use 2.x or 3.x for > > rolling tarballs. release.py uses own swig version compiled directly > > from swig upstream sources, so availability of swig3 in OS packages > > isn't a blocker for upgrading release.py's swig version. > > > > (And tarball users don't need swig at all) > > If release.py will require swig 3, then I won't be able to roll releases > until the OpenBSD port gets updated. I don't have a problem with that, but > it seems people were expecting me to roll another 1.10 alpha soon, so...
I missed this part of the text I quoted :) release.py uses own swig version compiled directly from swig upstream sources, so availability of swig3 in OS packages isn't a blocker for upgrading release.py's swig version. So, yes, indeed, it sounds ok then.
