From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Neil Jerram Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: request review: branch "wingo" Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 23:23:08 +0100 Message-ID: <877i24nhdf.fsf@arudy.ossau.uklinux.net> References: <874oxapu6c.fsf@arudy.ossau.uklinux.net> <87fxgtnulh.fsf@arudy.ossau.uklinux.net> <87y6ukrexv.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1238624645 13608 80.91.229.12 (1 Apr 2009 22:24:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 22:24:05 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org To: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?=) Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Apr 02 00:25:24 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Lp8s5-0001H9-Fv for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2009 00:25:21 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54393 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Lp8qh-0003zr-QW for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 18:23:55 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Lp8qf-0003zc-PW for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 18:23:53 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Lp8qa-0003zQ-Dk for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 18:23:52 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=45482 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Lp8qa-0003zN-8E for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 18:23:48 -0400 Original-Received: from mail3.uklinux.net ([80.84.72.33]:35383) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Lp8qY-0007CR-BT; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 18:23:46 -0400 Original-Received: from arudy (host86-157-180-39.range86-157.btcentralplus.com [86.157.180.39]) by mail3.uklinux.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C5541F67FC; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 23:23:09 +0100 (BST) Original-Received: from arudy.ossau.uklinux.net (arudy [127.0.0.1]) by arudy (Postfix) with ESMTP id A69963801E; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 23:23:08 +0100 (BST) In-Reply-To: <87y6ukrexv.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?=22's?= message of "Wed\, 01 Apr 2009 09\:49\:48 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4-2.6 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:8384 Archived-At: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=E8s) writes: > Hi Neil, > > Neil Jerram writes: > >> Should we then put the Makefile.am code back? Or does that break your >> uninstalled usage? Other things being equal, I think it's more >> important for the generated guile-config to be simple, than for our >> Makefile.am to be simple. > > Speaking of which, should we mark `guile-config' as deprecated in favor > of `pkg-config' (in 1.9)? I have no objection to that. We still want to support existing scripts, of course - but I assume that's why you said "mark as deprecated" and not "remove". :-) Neil