Re: conversation submodule questions

[Schanzenbach, Martin]

Hi,

unfortunately I would have to look into this first myself but a general remark:

Why are we conditionally building subsystems anyway? Shouldn't we simply have a
set of subsystem which are always built and then have switches to dis/enable 
others?
Then, if a dependency is missing, configure should simply error.

As it is, you never really know what the configure result will be. It depends 
on the system
libraries. Which is really odd.

Maybe we should change that in general in order to avoid the confusion below?

> On 26. Oct 2019, at 09:57, ng0 <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> Good morning.
> 
> I have a couple of questions for building conversation.
> 
> 1. conversation is no longer experimental, is that true or
>   was the change prior to my documentation change a mistake?
> 
> 2. we search for libpulse + gstreamer + libopus in the
>   context of building conversation or not.
>   As far as I understand it, we try to avoid pulseaudio
>   in pkgsrc when possible, so my understanding right now
>   while reading the checks someone wrote:
> 
>   -> if we have either pulse, opus, or ogg,
>      -> check if we have gst and if we do,
>         -> if we have conversation_backend=none
>            do not build conversation (disable both
>            conversation Makefile guarding conditions).
>         -> else enable BUILD_GST_HELPERS
>            in this case, conversation == build with gst,
>            no pulseaudio required (?)
>      -> check if we have conversation_backend=pulse, if so
>         -> set BUILD_PULSE_HELPERS to true
>            set BUILD_GST_HELPERS to false.
>            in this case we don't require gst and only require
>            libpulse?
>      In the end we record the result conditionally in BUILD_CONVERSATION,
>      which we don't use in the Makefiles so far.
> 
> Are the obversations above true?
>