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 j2TNX7vk005896 for ; Tue, 29 Mar 2005 23:33:07 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 1DGQCp-0003Qp-5z for gentoo-dev@robin.gentoo.org; Tue, 29 Mar 2005 23:33:07 +0000 Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 17:33:08 -0600 From: Brian Harring To: gentoo-dev@robin.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GTK und GTK2 Use Flag Message-ID: <20050329233308.GH29694@exodus> References: <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> <20050329222936.GF29694@exodus> <1112137992.13737.21.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="jy6Sn24JjFx/iggw" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1112137992.13737.21.camel@rivendell> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-Archives-Salt: 23d0021a-b266-48f8-a54c-3749f6b69aab X-Archives-Hash: 6dd2ef761f0fc6b76735e05232293a6b --jy6Sn24JjFx/iggw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 01:13:12AM +0200, foser wrote: > On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 16:29 -0600, Brian Harring wrote: > > 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. >=20 > I know the proposed system obviously and it's still flawed in that > really doesn't deal with USE flag versioning in a consistent, > predictable way. State how it's flawed please. If you're going to argue this is a=20 repeat of the gtk2/gtk fiasco that's in the tree currently, please=20 validate how/why it is. The approach detailed above, and in aug '04=20 *is* the most flexible approach with use flags that addresses user=20 needs, and is extensible (gtk3). > > 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. >=20 > That is all the reason needed here. I'm no biggie on the current > situation (altough if people actually read the USE flag descriptions it > wouldn't be half the issue), but interchanging to be deprecated > behaviour with something just as bad is a regression. I'll post more on > some changes that I'd like to see implemented for this later. >=20 > And the issue never has been about changing a few occurances in the > tree. Well, the issue is what then? It's an often requested change. While=20 people *should* know wth they're flipping on via looking in use.desc,=20 use flags *should* be relatively sane/clear in their implications, at=20 least on a general scale. ~brian --jy6Sn24JjFx/iggw Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCSeW0vdBxRoA3VU0RArTBAKCgpP0zDw5d/tkRGcxv5HcJK4x78QCgw7Zt mg+odKkguf8/2LO8C2MUo3Q= =5WpP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --jy6Sn24JjFx/iggw-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list