Re: [INTERNALS-WIN] [PATCH] Static dependency errors

Actually, reviewing what you wrote there...

> As part of online discussion and IRC, we already define this behavior.
> It was also discussion to have different levels of configure errors
> (warning, fatal, etc.). The idea is also to display only the relevant
> information and it is what the summary begin to do (while leaving the
> possibility to have a verbose and noisy output as now).

There's nothing in my patch that would prevent this. The main thrust of it 
is to simply remove a failing extension rather than to (as now) prevent that 
extension ever being added in the first place.

The difference is purely that local configuration files get to be as they 
were, i.e. simple and straightforward, and the hard work is done in the 
central script instead.

There is much in that patch that I thought was genuinely open for discussion 
before I even posted it, but I fail to see why making extension authors' 
lives easier should be dismissed out of hand.

Perhaps the best plan is for me to wait until you commit your stuff and then 
look again at applying something similar to this. The logic's there, it 
would be trivial to adapt it to whatever you have up your sleeve.

The biggest concern of course is time...

- Steph