Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>Wouldn't it be better to get libtool 1.5 out the door? The resources >>required to achieve a releasable product are similar and CVS libtool >>already contains most of the fixes that would go into a 1.4.3. > > > But it also contains more features. Releasing 1.5 should be done by > the maintainers, not by a "community" process; instead I think that > such a process is perfectly valid to review patches and ChangeLogs and > put them together. >
The community are the maintainers, therefore a maintainer has spoken for a minor version increment, rather than a patch release increment. Enough has changed to increment the minor version number. > Yes, libtool would-be-1.5 has been used by gcc at least since 3.0, so it > should be pretty good, but I think that it is easier (in terms of > brainwork, not of needed resources) to do a "definitive" 1.4.x release. > Since I'm one of the community, I suggest the release to be 1.5 and that Akim's suggestion for AC_PREREQ a strong point. Perhaps, both a 1.4.3 and a 1.5 where 1.4.3 does a AC_PREREQ 2.13. Earnie.
