On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 10:35:12PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 07:54:58PM +0000, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > As others have said, configure already supports both 2.x and 3.x. The
> > remaining question is just whether release.py should use 2.x or 3.x for
> > rolling tarballs. release.py uses own swig version compiled directly
> > from swig upstream sources, so availability of swig3 in OS packages
> > isn't a blocker for upgrading release.py's swig version.
> > (And tarball users don't need swig at all)
> If release.py will require swig 3, then I won't be able to roll releases
> until the OpenBSD port gets updated. I don't have a problem with that, but
> it seems people were expecting me to roll another 1.10 alpha soon, so...
I missed this part of the text I quoted :)
release.py uses own swig version compiled directly
from swig upstream sources, so availability of swig3 in OS packages
isn't a blocker for upgrading release.py's swig version.
So, yes, indeed, it sounds ok then.
Received on 2017-07-11 22:53:07 CEST