Re: AC_DIVERSION_INIT and autoconf 2.52

[Tobias Hunger]

On Thu, 2002-02-07 at 11:16, Akim Demaille wrote:
> People use a tool which is becoming much bigger than what envisioned
> at its inception.  It was originally used only by a set of hackers who
> keep in touch with the author of that tool.  They know each other,
> they participate to the development, read the mailing lists, know the
> conventions, the unwritten things etc.
> 
> Then the tool has an unexpected success.  A world wide success.
> People use it more and more, come with more and more demands.  The
> tool grows, and becomes fat.  So fat actually, that it's sick.  Its
> internals are stretched so much, that it finally becomes necessary to
> do major surgery in its guts, to keep it alive.
> 
> But some guy comes and says ``Hey, no way!  Don't touch that organ, I
> use it as is!  I never came on the lists and asked if it was moral and
> sane to use it, but I'm the All Mighty User, and I know better than
> you what I need, which turns out to be necessarily what needs the
> tool''.
> 
> Convinced, the original maintainer continues building his cathedral on
> rotten foundations.  Of course the tool becomes crippled with bugs,
> and a couple of years later, it is simply not usable any longer.
> 
> I think that's bad practice.

All my organs are clearly marked as 'private' by a number of legal
documents.

Stefan did complain about the lack of a way to tell private from public
macros, not about you changing private macros. What should a user of
autoconf do? Send a list of macros he wants to use to this list to
figure out which of them are OKto use and which are not?

-- 
Gruss,
Tobias

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Tobias Hunger                  The box said: 'Windows 95 or better'
address@hidden                  So I installed Linux.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part