Hi, 2012/1/8 Måns Rullgård <[email protected]>: > Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> writes: >> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 12:47:13AM +0000, Måns Rullgård wrote: >>> Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> writes: >>> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 12:56:36AM +0100, Luca Barbato wrote: >>> >> On 13/12/11 00:52, Måns Rullgård wrote: >>> >> >Luca Barbato<[email protected]> writes: >>> >> >>On 13/12/11 00:32, Diego Biurrun wrote: >>> >> >>>--- >>> >> >>> Makefile | 4 +++- >>> >> >>> doc/developer.texi | 4 +--- >>> >> >>> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >>> >> >> >>> >> >>Seems ok. >>> >> > >>> >> >But oh so pointless. >>> >> >>> >> Shall we drop it then? >>> > >>> > No. It's a convenient shorthand that will reduce the number of >>> > mistakes in the long run if all developers pick up the habit. >>> >>> People fail to do even the most elementary checking today. This will >>> never change. >> >> Flaming aside :) >> >> This issue has come up again with the breakage of the h264-test program. >> This just adds one line and can save us from such troubles. > > Believe me, it will not help with anything whatsoever. Why would > renaming the test cause people to suddenly start running it?
I agree with this; a bunch of test programs are useless if they're not run. If they are not tests, but examples, they should be renamed as such. Which are they? Examples or tests? If they are tests, what is the expected outcome, what do they test, why aren't they in fate already? Ronald _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
