Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 13:29:59 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: DJGPP 2.04 release date
In-Reply-To: <3AF8778D.B147D3D3@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010509132938.19857P-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Tue, 8 May 2001, Richard Dawe wrote:

> >   - mkdoc changes (or did we already commit them?)
> 
> The mkdoc changes haven't been checked in AFAIK. I think the discussion
> got lost amongst a flurry of mails. From what I remember I had modified it
> to everything that was suggested, apart from being able to define
> arbitrary portability targets in the texinfo.
> 
> If the mkdoc changes are OK, then I can commit them.

If you can build the latest CVS with it, I think it can go in.

> (Unless I need the paperwork to commit that too.)

That's up to DJ, I guess.

> > In addition, I have a wish list of enhancements that are hard to
> > explain in one punch line; if someone wants to hear, I will post their
> > descriptions.
> 
> If it's not too much hassle, I'd like to hear those too. It might be
> useful to have them archive on djgpp-workers too, so you can just point
> people at this thread.

I think I already posted at least some of them in the past.  I'll try
to find time to look that up and post anything that isn't there.