On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 12:55:15PM +0100, Måns Rullgård wrote: > Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> writes: > > On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 11:11:34AM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote: > >> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 10:36:07AM +0100, Måns Rullgård wrote: > >> > Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> writes: > >> > > >> > > True, but this patch fixes Doxygen generation without changing policy > >> > > about which parts of libav Doxygen documentation is extracted from. > >> > > Can we please apply this, fix the build, and settle the policy issue > >> > > separately? > >> > > >> > No. This patch attempts to fix a problem by explicitly enumerating > >> > everything that should _not_ be used by doxygen. Maintaining negative > >> > lists is always error-prone. It is better to list what _should_ be > >> > included. > >> > >> I don't see how it's that much more error-prone than maintaining a positive > >> list. Both lists have to be updated when directories get added or renamed. > >> At this point, a positive list would need to include all library dirs and > >> their subdirs, as well as the top level. That positive list has way more > >> entries and they change more frequently than we add non-library top-level > >> directories. > > > > .. ping .. > > The arguments against this still stand.
As do the counterarguments - stalemate then? Note that nobody responded to my counterarguments. Diego _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
