On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 01:54:25PM +0200, Hendrik Leppkes wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 12:50:05AM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote: >> >> This allows excluding the samples-rsync target from conditions that >> >> atch all other fate-related targets. >> >> --- >> >> >> >> This now deprecates the target instead of dropping it. The second patch >> >> remains simple and fate-rsync stays in place for those intent on not >> >> changing their scripts. >> >> >> >> Better names than "samples-rsync" welcome. "(r)sync-samples" maybe? >> >> >> >> doc/fate.texi | 4 ++-- >> >> doc/git-howto.texi | 2 +- >> >> tests/Makefile | 9 ++++++--- >> >> 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >> > >> > So, can everybody live with this solution? >> >> I still think fate-rsync sounds better as a name, and the rename is >> really not all that useful. > > Except that it fixes the small problem this patchset tackles...
Just add an exception into the pattern in the other patch and be done with it. _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
