[vlc-devel] [vlc-commits] Qt4: remove isFirstRun parameter

[Rémi Denis-Courmont]

Le mardi 26 mars 2013 19:44:01, Jean-Baptiste Kempf a écrit :
> The issue is you called me a liar/badfaither, because I said that the main
> issue for VLC in corporations was not "statically linking to libdvdcss".

As I already wrote on IRC, I think that this is a misunderstanding mostly due 
to an Outlook-grade quoting failure on my part. The biggest corporation 
problem is hard to define, and I do not pretend to hold the absolutely truth in 
that respect.


However, I gave you the benefit of the doubt when you first accused me of 
unilaterally changing semantics. Afterall, nobody can remember all 6 years old 
bugs. I provided the proof to the contrary. I was merely addressing in good 
faith a reoccurrence of an old bug.  Not saving command line options, 
whichever they may be, has been subject to at least two bugs, one authored by 
you, and has also been discussed at the last VDD that Hartman attended. I 
provided the bug references already.

Regardless you maintained that I, in pushing this commit, "[broke] existant 
(sic) behaviour, without discussion". At that point and in this particular 
case, I perceive the claim as a lie, an expression of bad faith. Consequently 
I deny any intended insult, although I acknowledge that some other people seem 
to have a more inclusive definition of an insult than I do.

Furthermore I also still consider the corporate aspect a red herring, which is 
a type of fallacy. It is understandable that corporations want to block the 
start dialog and automatic updates. But that is not an excuse to carry a 
mailing list filibuster against a legitimate bug fix of mine, and then put my 
methodology into question especially in public.

I never prevented or threatened to prevent you or anyone else from 
implementing such a feature. Obviously I expect it not to create or 
reintroduce bugs. Just like custom language support, I can even review any 
proposed patch, even though I personally do not care about the feature in 
question. I just do not have any obligation to implement your feature desires 
or to abstain from fixing known bugs even if you consider them as features.


As for the term "plonk", I use it as a shorthand to put to an end an argument 
that is going nowhere. I reckon it might or might not be considered an insult 
depending of which etymology it is given, notably the one where L refers to 
"lamer". In that respect, I regret using such an ambiguous phrasing.

-- 
Rémi Denis-Courmont
http://www.remlab.net/