From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j2TMTbtM002063 for ; Tue, 29 Mar 2005 22:29:37 GMT Received: from adsl-67-39-48-198.dsl.milwwi.ameritech.net ([67.39.48.198] helo=exodus) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1DGPDM-000479-MT for gentoo-dev@robin.gentoo.org; Tue, 29 Mar 2005 22:29:36 +0000 Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 16:29:36 -0600 From: Brian Harring To: gentoo-dev@robin.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GTK und GTK2 Use Flag Message-ID: <20050329222936.GF29694@exodus> References: <20050329111138.GA10169@stud.seeling33.de> <200503291324.33892@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> <20050329113538.GA4377@valinor.dynalias.net> <20050329115039.GB29694@exodus> <20050329130951.GA25810@valinor.dynalias.net> <20050329133906.GC29694@exodus> <20050329141948.GA13248@valinor.dynalias.net> <20050329153857.GA9499@stud.seeling33.de> <1112116825.23696.46.camel@powerix.local.c0ffeine.de> <1112132150.13737.9.camel@rivendell> Precedence: bulk List-Post: , , List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="VS++wcV0S1rZb1Fb" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1112132150.13737.9.camel@rivendell> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-Archives-Salt: bfc999f2-ecd4-4bf1-8625-9bbb26af71dd X-Archives-Hash: 7197941ff4d6178e259323cd99de7a6c --VS++wcV0S1rZb1Fb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 11:35:50PM +0200, foser wrote: > On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 19:20 +0200, Markus Nigbur wrote: > >=20 > The gtk2 flag is meant to be removed in time, not to be promoted even > more -than it was ever meant to be- as it is. >=20 > Do it right this time this time, don't try to redo it in as much a > crappy way as it is now. The proposals here are as much time-context > dependant as the current solution is. *cough* quicky question then... What are you going to do when gtk v3 hits? Deprecate gtk v2? Expect=20 upstream to quickly migrate all projects/code to v3? Cause projects=20 sure moved off of v1 in a hurry :P Continuing, when v3 hits, abuse this same interdependent use flag=20 trickery interdependent, or move to sane versioned use flags? Personally at this rate I'm expecting xmms to be gtk1 dependant for as=20 long as gtk-1* compiles, probably right up through when gtk v3 some=20 day hits :) If you use the approach I've laid out (yes, not new, I laid it out in=20 24439) you wouldn't have to dick around with deprecating a version,=20 nor essentially mandating what version is default. You'd leave the=20 total control over what versions the user wants to deal with in the=20 hands of the _users_, and what versions the package supports would=20 be represented properly/clearly in the IUSE. So far... I've not really heard a good reason aside from "it's in=20 place, we'll just deprecate gtk v1 instead of clean it up" for why=20 this cannot be corrected _now_, or really in the past. hell, you even have volunteers. :) ~brian --VS++wcV0S1rZb1Fb Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCSdbQvdBxRoA3VU0RAhdKAKC7uB2SExwfMX6mrbT9sbqOq1W4kQCfWyAN xG1Bf+TnDrzAt8AvFbimXIo= =8ENZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --VS++wcV0S1rZb1Fb-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list