Updating waf to 1.6

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 01:06:53AM +0100, Thomas Moschny wrote:
> 2011/1/17 Simo Sorce <ssorce at redhat.com>:
> > The best thing is to not package waf on and in itself, and let package
> > embed the right version. At least until waf becomes mature enough that
> > the rate of change slows down to the point that option 1 becomes
> > feasible.
> >
> > Option 2 is just begging for maintenance nightmares.
> 
> Seems most people agree on that pov. But it would be good to also get
> FPC's blessing. One of the affected package maintainers should file a
> trac ticket.
> 
+1 to FPC blessing.  Like I said, we can probably carve up something that
explains both the waf POV and configure scripts here... but it'll need
someone who knows waf to be able to explain, for instance, how waf differs
from autoconf which has both a non-bundled and non-bundled component.

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20110117/5d602376/attachment.bin