* Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010805 14:51]:
> Tom Lane writes:
>
> > Just moments after writing that, I was startled to read on another
> > mailing list that the long-mythical Autoconf 2.50 is released!
>
> Last I checked 2.51 was also released. AC 2.50 had some quality issues in
> m
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Last I checked 2.51 was also released. AC 2.50 had some quality issues in
> my mind which were probably fixed by now. If we see a need we can update;
> I suppose it depends on the release schedule. (Note that some non-trivial
> patches will be need
Tom Lane writes:
> Just moments after writing that, I was startled to read on another
> mailing list that the long-mythical Autoconf 2.50 is released!
Last I checked 2.51 was also released. AC 2.50 had some quality issues in
my mind which were probably fixed by now. If we see a need we can upd
* Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010730 18:34]:
> I wrote:
> > If autoconf releases were happening on a regular basis, we could get
> > away with just tracking the released version of autoconf for these
> > files. However, they aren't and we can't.
>
> Just moments after writing that, I was start
