Am Sonntag, den 17.03.2013, 18:06 +0100 schrieb Klaus Schmidinger: > On 17.03.2013 18:00, Carsten Koch wrote: > > On 03/17/13 13:00, Klaus Schmidinger wrote: > >> On 17.03.2013 12:46, Ville Skyttä wrote: > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> Should probably have spoken earlier, but is there any particular reason > >>> for the ugly and hard to read Makefile variable names LCLBLD and PLGCFG? > >>> I suppose they're short for LOCALBUILD and PLUGINCONFIG, but why do they > >>> have to be short for anything, it's not like we're running out of space > >>> for their names anywhere, is it? Besides, I don't think LCLBLD describes > >>> what its effects are very well, INPLACE would sounds better to me. > >>> > >>> The ship may already have sailed for plgcfg in vdr.pc as it's being used > >>> by many plugin Makefiles already, but I believe the attached patches > >>> should be safe for 2.0.0. > >> > >> I'm afraid it's too late for that. > > > > I do not understand why it should be too late. > > 2.0 is not out yet. > > But we're in the final testing phase. > Besides, Ville's patch also touched the Makefiles of plugins - and > plugin authors and distribution managers react very intense when they > have to modify their files ;-). If I am not mistaken, Ville’s issue was that the names were not clear. Could a comment be added to the Makefile what the meaning is then. That should not break anything. […] Thanks, Paul
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ vdr mailing list vdr@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
