Re: AC_PACKAGE_VERSION visibility slightly changed in autoconf-2.69c. Bug or feature?

[Nick Bowler]

On 2020-10-22, Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com> wrote:
> I acknowledge that requiring double-quotation of AC_INIT arguments
> when they contain characters significant to M4 _should_ work; however,
> it did not work in my tests (which were not exactly the same as the
> above; see the "AC_INIT with unusual version strings" test case in
> tests/base.m4, on the branch).  Also, it increases the compat hit
> we're taking, since e.g.
>
>     AC_INIT(GNU MP, GMP_VERSION, [gmp-bugs@gmplib.org, see
>     https://gmplib.org/manual/Reporting-Bugs.html], gmp)
>
> which also worked with 2.69, will now be considered invalid,

If this works in 2.69 I don't see why this snippet would be rendered
invalid if AC_INIT did not over/underquote, because ...

> Would you care to propose a complete patch to be applied on top of
> zack/ac-init-quoting?  In addition to "reverting hunks" you would need
> to make sure that AC_PACKAGE_* are always treated consistently within
> lib/autoconf/*.m4, fix the testsuite by adding double quotation to AC_INIT
> arguments where necessary, and document in both doc/autoconf.texi and NEWS
> the changed requirements for AC_INIT arguments.

... I am not suggesting we change any behaviour to AC_INIT arguments wrt.
quoting, as compared to Autoconf 2.69.  As far as I know this version
dutifully follows typical m4 quoting conventions, I am not aware of
any specific under/overquotation in existing releases.

This underquotation (2.69c) and overquotation (zack/ac-init-quoting
branch) is a behaviour change compared to 2.69.  I am proposing we NOT
change the amount of quoting, but rather we should stick with normal m4
conventions, which would avoid all the AC_INIT-related regressions I've
seen reported so far to this list.

Anyway, I should have some time on the weekend, I'll see what I can do
about proposing a proper patch :)

Cheers,
  Nick