Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from April 2017
On 04/06/2017 01:05 PM, Karl Williamson wrote:
> On 4/6/2017 11:52 AM, Sawyer X wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 04/06/2017 02:41 AM, Leon Timmermans wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 6:18 PM, Karl Williamson via RT
>>> <perlbug-followup@perl.org> wrote:
>>>> It occurs to me another argument in favor of keeping it fatal is, as
>>>> I've said before, I think it is safer when making a change that can
>>>> cause working programs to have a different behavior, to have that
>>>> syntax to be fatal for a release or two. That's why I originally
>>>> was going to have /xx be fatal for 5.26. But the fact that it was
>>>> fatal during essentially the entirety of the 5.25 series without a
>>>> single BBC report convinced me it was ok to go ahead and change the
>>>> meaning.
>>>>
>>>> I think that by making this portion of the unescaped '{' fatal in
>>>> 5.26, we will lessen the chances that the final portion will create
>>>> problems in future releases.
>>> It seems that right now we're breaking autoconf by making this fatal.
>>> *Autoconf*. It has been fixed in their repository, but they haven't
>>> done a stable release in years. Think of that what you want, but
>>> there's a staggering amount of software depending on autoconf.
>>>
>>> I don't see how we can not revert this fatalization given these
>>> circumstances. The advantages are too theoretical to offset this very
>>> practical problem, and reverting would give us at least a year to deal
>>> with autotools' release inertia.
>>
>> I agree. This leaves us little room but to simply revert this and manage
>> a release of Autoconf before we revert it at the very least.
>>
>
> I have sent an email to the maintainers, asking for when they plan to
> release an update.
>
I already received a response, which was effectively, "whenever I can
get to it; didn't make it last December, when I hoped"
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next