Re: guile-snarf writes to $srcdir, which is not kosher

[Rob Browning]

Thien-Thi Nguyen <address@hidden> writes:

> of course these things follow.  i'm not questioning the consequence of
> the approach, but the wisdom of using that approach in the first place,
> which seems backwards and make-work-ful to me.

Well I wasn't implying it's how you'd want to do everything, or even
most things, just mentioning in passing that there were *some* things
that I'd done that way.  Might have been better if I hadn't said
anything.

Furthermore, as I've said several times before, I consider 1.6 a
special case -- it has taken too long to get out the door, and as such
there's been more divergence between the 1.6 branch and HEAD than
anyone would like.  While I'm trying to make sure we set things up so
that's less likely to happen again, it *has* happened.  As a result,
changes for one side may not apply as easily as we'd like to the other
side.  This means that when I need to make changes that I *know* have
to go into 1.6, but probably aren't appropriate (in the same form) for
HEAD, I may in fact just write them for 1.6 and then see if they
can/should be trivially ported to HEAD.  If not, then I make a note of
the pending to-do item for 1.8.  In some cases, coming up with a fix
for HEAD as well right now would likely be a waste of time.

-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org, @linuxdevel.com, and @debian.org
Previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG=1C58 8B2C FB5E 3F64 EA5C  64AE 78FE E5FE F0CB A0AD