[vlc-devel] [PATCH 00/14] Move VLM implementation to a module

[Rémi Denis-Courmont]

Le tiistaina 15. syyskuuta 2020, 23.13.17 EEST Jean-Baptiste Kempf a écrit :
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2020, at 20:10, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
> > Le tiistaina 15. syyskuuta 2020, 20.37.32 EEST Romain Vimont a écrit :
> > > This removes a lot of VLM code (including parsing) from libvlccore.
> > 
> > What is the actual point of this?
> 
> At some point, we cannot go on like that.

Yeah. You (and others) have got to stop accusing me of removing VLM all the 
time.

> You refuse to allow any incremental change

Seriously what the bloody hell? You're the one that rejected the last proposed 
incremental change to VLM. And *you* have failed to even support your 
assertions back then, which were ostensibly false.

I proposed to remove the completely broken VLM schedules and retain the clunky 
but mostly not broken VLM broadcasts. I'd still like to know what OS supports 
VLM and does not support some form of scheduled tasks...

> on and any approach around VLM,
> because you've decided that you don't want VLM in VLC (because it is
> broken, according to you) and because it is in the core. 

You've got to stop putting words in my mouth.

> At the same time, you block any improvement of the code of VLM,

1) This has nothing to do with VLM. This has everything to do with when we do 
and don't put code in modules versus the core.

2) This patchset is not an improvement. The mere that you resort to BS instead 
of explaining how it would be an improvement is pretty telling in itself.

> you remove VLM features,

BS. So I was the one to commit the VoD removal, but that was decided in a 
meeting with almost everybody in favor of the removal and liek one or two 
persons not caring either way.

> you block moving it outside of the core to make a simpler core

More BS. This patchset is making things more complicated.

> and simpler evolution...

There's no evolution here. All it seems to do is move code around, adding one 
layer of indirection, and *breaking* the log prefixes.

> This is going on and on, and not just about VLM, and this is not acceptable
> to me.

What is unacceptable here is your repeated behaviour of throwing false 
accusations and nonsensical arguments against people (especially but not 
limited to me) that don't go Your Way.

-- 
Реми Дёни-Курмон
http://www.remlab.net/