On Thu, 6 May 2021, Andy Tai wrote:
a general question: would a rewrite in Python or some other language,
to keep the same functionality as the current implementation, a viable
goal, or that would not be a productive thing to do?
There are several major aspects of Automake. One is the use of
a general question: would a rewrite in Python or some other language,
to keep the same functionality as the current implementation, a viable
goal, or that would not be a productive thing to do?
On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 1:44 PM Bob Friesenhahn
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 6 May 2021, Karl Berry wrote:
> >
>
On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 4:44 PM Bob Friesenhahn
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 6 May 2021, Karl Berry wrote:
> >
> > (*) https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake/2021-03/msg00018.html
> > So far the response has been nil.
>
> I don't recall seeing that email. I did see an email thread regarding
> Autoconf
On Thu, 6 May 2021, Karl Berry wrote:
(*) https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake/2021-03/msg00018.html
So far the response has been nil.
I don't recall seeing that email. I did see an email thread regarding
Autoconf which immediately became a lot of "need to support this soon"
and "wou
I think automake really needs to support this soon.
Sounds reasonable to me, but to be clear, Automake will only support
things that volunteers care enough about to actually dig into the
code and write patches for. New developers/maintainers are needed.
As I previously explained(*) / pleaded,
