2007-04-27 sumo is missing MANIFEST.erc
mike.kupfer at xemacs.org
Sat Dec 20 13:49:03 EST 2008
>>>>> "ST" == Stephen J Turnbull <stephen at xemacs.org> writes:
>>>>> "MK" == Mike Kupfer writes:
MK> I think I knew what an auto-autoloads file was before signing up to
MK> be a package maintainer, but I certainly never built one.
ST> If you've done "cd /path/to/some/package; make" then you have done
ST> so, although you may not have been aware of it. ;-)
Yes, but I didn't start paying attention to the CVS repository until I
signed up to be the Gnus maintainer. So I wouldn't have used "make"
with the packages until then.
ST> This is the real problem with the "fix 21.4" solution, in any case.
ST> It doesn't fix the underlying problem, which is that there is no
ST> provision for further extensions of this kind. If there are any
ST> (and I bet there will be, I can think of at least one def* I'd like
ST> to have, namely "defnamespace"), then we'll have to fix 21.4 again.
ST> As package-future.el shows, there's no need to suffer through that.
I don't see it as suffering, though that might reflect my background as
a Solaris developer, where build hosts are expected to be running recent
bits (no more than a month old).
Still, it's not something I have a strong opinion on. The only thing I
really care about is that we fix the package build and move forward. To
borrow a line from the California budget mess, neither approach is
ideal, but they're both better than doing nothing.
More information about the XEmacs-Beta