On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 05:10:36PM +0200, Rafael Sadowski wrote: > On Wed Apr 26, 2017 at 09:27:03AM +0200, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 09:14:37AM +0200, Rafael Sadowski wrote: > > > On Wed Apr 26, 2017 at 08:54:01AM +0200, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 08:35:02AM +0200, Rafael Sadowski wrote: > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > > > stellarium without Doxygen. OK? Comments? > > > > > > > > I'm fine with it. > > > > While we're at it, what's the rational behind these recent Doxygen > > > > changes? Is > > > > it to remove it from ports or ? > > > > > > https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports&m=147433167219051&w=2 > > > > > > Long story short: Last doxygen updates made many plist changes. > > > > I don't see any mention of stellarium in there. > > > > From this point of view, I agree but you fetch doxygen as build > dependency only to create a "apidoc" cmake target which is never used. > In my opinion, is better to disable all these doxygen cases and save one > build dependency.
Sure sure, I am not saying I don't agree with it. I was just trying to understand the rational :-) Thanks. -- Antoine
