Re: Extensions to M4sh

[Zack Weinberg]

On Mon, May 2, 2022, at 2:30 AM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 5/1/22 19:06, Alex Ameen wrote:
>> Whoever is most
>> actively working on M4sh would be an incredibly useful contact for me, so
>> if "that's you" let me know.
>
> To be honest right now I think "that's you" is the correct answer. As 
> in, you're the one.

I concur.  Right now it seems like nobody is actively working on anything in 
Autoconf, so if you've got patches that makes you the most active contributor.

I am probably the person who most recently _worked_ on m4sh and I would be 
happy to review the patches you have.

> If these are extensions to m4sh (as opposed to changes) and would be 
> useful outside libtool it sounds like Autoconf would be a good home for 
> them, whatever they are.

The trickiest thing here is probably going to be release management.  I 
certainly wouldn't mind turning the crank on an autoconf 2.72 that just had the 
m4sh improvements + whatever other patches have been committed since 2.71, if 
that would make your life easier; however, presumably you don't want to make 
libtool N+1 _require_ the hypothetical autoconf 2.72, so you will need to carry 
the improvements yourself for a while, and we'll have to coordinate changes 
between both copies.

zw