[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Nmh-workers] Minor git nits, and autotools junk

From: Ken Hornstein
Subject: Re: [Nmh-workers] Minor git nits, and autotools junk
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2010 09:45:00 -0500

>This brings up a question -- do we want to move to having
>patches posted to the mailing list for review before they
>are committed? That's what other git-using projects I deal
>with do, and it's much easier to do that emailing with git...

Hm.  I guess I'm of two minds about this; I can see the value, but there's
also a bit of a question of the process here; if someone posts a patch,
what's the process for reviewing it?

I guess I'd like to play it by ear; I mean, we don't have a lot of
committers putting wacky crap in there right now.  Okay, sure, I
committed the TLS support recently and that broke a few things, but I
fixed them; seems that most developers take responsibility for fixing
stuff they break.  If it's something more complicated, well, we could
always have people put stuff on a branch and ask people to look at it.
And I'd rather keep the barrier for people who are actually writing code
rather low.  What do others think?

>>  Anyway, I guess my point here is: I'm thinking of converting nmh over to
>>  Automake; I've started using it for a few projects here, and it just
>>  Makes Things Easier.
>I'm not much of a fan of automake. I think our current
>makefiles are fine, personally.

Hm, okay, given the above point ... would you object to a git branch
with the Makefiles converted over to automake?  Would you be willing to
take a look at it to see if you like it better or worse?  I just ran
into a whole pile of cruft when I was adding the TLS support, and I
think switching to Automake would make things a whole lot easier.  If
the consensus goes against Automake, I'm willing to let that branch

>No we don't, not if you mean GNU libtool. We check for and use
>the MacOS libtool (which is a sort of ar+ranlib replacement, apparently)
>and we carefully avoid running libtool if it's the GNU one. (Check
>the ChangeLog.)

Whoops, you're right.  My apologies.

>>- Unrelated to that, I'm kinda getting tired of the damn warnings when I
>>  run autoreconf about acconfig.h; I'm thinking of putting the rest of
>>  the things in acconfig.h into autoconf via --enable switches; comments?
>I think we should clean that up and get rid of the warnings, yes.

Alright, that I will work on.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]