[vlc-devel] [vlc-commits] Revert "Add subdir-objects automake option where appropriate"
funman at videolan.org
Tue Sep 17 13:14:18 CEST 2013
Le 17/09/2013 09:23, Rémi Denis-Courmont a écrit :
> On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 03:29:37 +0200, Rafaël Carré <funman at videolan.org>
>> Le 14/09/2013 14:26, Rémi Denis-Courmont a écrit :
>>> vlc/vlc-2.1 | branch: master | Rémi Denis-Courmont <remi at remlab.net> |
>>> Sat Sep 14 15:25:00 2013 +0300|
>>> [8138925733a4e66b78cf0eca046c3861c69a93c8] | committer: Rémi
>>> Revert "Add subdir-objects automake option where appropriate"
>>> Complete support for subdirectory objects would be too invasive.
>>> Please stick to GNU/automake <= 1.13 for VLC <= 2.1.
>> Why was this patch not sent for review in the first place?
> "Complete support for subdirectory objects would be too invasive."
>> Same question for all the following patches meant to fix automake 1.4
> None of the following patches were written or pushed by myself.
>> especially considering the breakage caused.
> Unlike *you*, I actually run distcheck on a *target* platform to validate
> the subdir patch.
I don't understand the link with *me* here, I hadn't had a chance to
test the patch before it was committed?
And I did ran distcheck to confirm it was indeed broken.
> It went exactly as far as it did before the subdir patch,
> due to preexisting bugs. So I also ran a manual install check and a Windows
> build, which both passed.
> The breakage was too subtle to be detected by me and while Diego might
> have spotted it, I am convinced that no VLC reviewer would have.
OK, I will stop sending patches from now on, because of too subtle
breakage and/or conviction that other developers are too stupid to find
bugs in my code.
> Besides the breakage was very minor; distclean is not exactly a major
> development blocker (Debian does use it, but for the very wrong reason of
> building VLC statically).
More information about the vlc-devel