Re: patch pings

[Alexandre Duret-Lutz]

>>> "RW" == Ralf Wildenhues <address@hidden> writes:

[...]

 RW> No problem.  Please indicate though which branches some patch should be
 RW> applied to (I write for HEAD only).  

That's fine, let's forget the branch, I don't plan to make an
1.9.7 unless something very serious happen.  I'd rather focus on
releasing 1.10 as soon as Autoconf is out.

 RW> You regenerate files with CVS Autoconf and with the
 RW> Automake version that is being checked in, right?

Yeah, just don't mention these files in ChangeLog.  I usually
don't a force full regeneration anytime I change a bit, I just
let it happen by make (unless that bit actually has an effect to
all Automake's Makefiles, of course -- one reason these files
are checked in is to force ourself looking how the real bits
changes), but any way is not really a problem.
-- 
Alexandre Duret-Lutz

Shared books are happy books.     http://www.bookcrossing.com/friend/gadl