From: William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Amount of useflags enabled by default
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 14:38:54 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091024193854.GA7616@linux1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4AE32A53.2080107@gentoo.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2558 bytes --]
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 06:24:51PM +0200, Thomas Sachau wrote:
> Petteri R??ty schrieb:
> > Thomas Sachau wrote:
> >> In addition, i see a trend to enabled more more more USE flags (either over profiles or via IUSE
> >> +flag). Whats the reason for forcing a big load of default enabled USE flags on every user including
> >> more dependencies, more compile time, more wasted disk space and more possible vulnerabilities
> >> except some users, who complain about a missing feature and are not able to think and enable a USE
> >> flag for that feature?
> >>
> >
> > One possible reason is that our packages should follow upstream policy
> > and maybe upstreams usually like to keep things enabled rather than
> > disabled.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Petteri
> >
> >
>
> With that argument you could request to enable all useflags by default. Its ok in my eyes, if you
> follow upstream the way tarballs are created (e.g. qt move to splitted qt packages or the other way
> round). Something else would make maintainence part much harder. But i disagree on the part for
> "follow upstream policy for default enabled USE flags".
> Gentoo is about choice and i would like to have the choice to disable most USE flags by default and
> with an easy way, e.g. by choising a profile with less default enabled USE flags. Forcing every user
> to disable many or almost all flags independent of his profile would make Gentoo less userfriendly
> in general without a good reason. If upstream does not want to support a disabled USE flag, they
> should not offer the choice to disable it in the first place.
I think there are two issues being put together here. One is the issue
of profiles enabling use flags by default, and the other is packages
enabling use flags by default in IUSE.
At the package level, I do think that we should follow the upstream
policy. Upstream giving you the option to disable something doesn't
mean that they don't support disabling it, it just means that they are
giving you the choice to disable it. If it is enabled by default, it
could mean that upstream has found that most of their users prefer to
enable it, so they set it up that way.
To me, the question really is at the profile level since enabling use
flags there has the potential to affect entire systems. I don't think
flags should be enabled at the profile level unless we are sure that
most users who use that profile will want the flags enabled.
--
William Hubbs
gentoo accessibility team lead
williamh@gentoo.org
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-24 19:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-23 16:56 [gentoo-dev] Amount of useflags enabled by default Thomas Sachau
2009-10-23 19:32 ` Sebastian Pipping
2009-10-24 16:14 ` Thomas Sachau
2009-10-23 19:54 ` Petteri Räty
2009-10-24 16:03 ` Pacho Ramos
2009-10-24 16:24 ` Thomas Sachau
2009-10-24 19:38 ` William Hubbs [this message]
2009-10-24 0:55 ` Alistair Bush
2009-10-24 16:35 ` Thomas Sachau
2009-11-06 23:40 ` Ed W
2009-11-07 7:46 ` [gentoo-dev] " Duncan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20091024193854.GA7616@linux1 \
--to=williamh@gentoo.org \
--cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox