From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D51A01381F3 for ; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 17:41:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 27BE5E08C0; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 17:41:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yh0-f47.google.com (mail-yh0-f47.google.com [209.85.213.47]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A6CFE0899 for ; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 17:41:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yh0-f47.google.com with SMTP id f73so758520yha.6 for ; Sat, 01 Jun 2013 10:41:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=/PzM91YDm8JJBw5r2dzGVv8sHFkn4szzo5WMpmAXreg=; b=OHphV9Cj7e4+4wkAhU1ApUu3PkFTL/Znm3o7NAgsUz3nW1UcEIICtIIddPrnhyJ2DZ LnYaJ0obFphuBtnQP7hjvwnhlIgH/V13AqKRC/OJkHTBSY/zN+9ftKLpmLZVRIuE5JFR 3hu3psxYXXg+zyVmmTuikkZKesJxQv59tfc8aAPnQ+/vmG4bK1ZxoC6pLx8hglefZYa0 HpsZpD2iXmPql6fIxp9f+TZP1tWu4ZopcE7LqpLnfyMqcF69Bb2k1uwP7DCsgg8fKwYp 5y++6LWTelkITp9X+RqfbsiQ7jTAwk7oS/+7Dp8fkABaA7pfAhTCvxaTs+zOI2YMmjVa f6jA== X-Received: by 10.236.150.16 with SMTP id y16mr10087668yhj.204.1370108470233; Sat, 01 Jun 2013 10:41:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from linux1 (cpe-76-187-91-128.tx.res.rr.com. [76.187.91.128]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id c31sm77113136yhn.6.2013.06.01.10.41.07 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 01 Jun 2013 10:41:08 -0700 (PDT) Sender: William Hubbs Received: by linux1 (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 01 Jun 2013 12:41:06 -0500 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2013 12:41:06 -0500 From: William Hubbs To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] New USE_EXPAND flag for www-servers/monkeyd Message-ID: <20130601174106.GA20043@linux1> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <51A3C431.7010900@gentoo.org> <20130528173513.50742051@gentoo.org> <51A4FDFF.3020103@gentoo.org> <20130528210737.42695fc9@gentoo.org> <20130528221540.GA2053@linux1> <20130530132359.04cf5815@sera-20.lan> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="YiEDa0DAkWCtVeE4" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130530132359.04cf5815@sera-20.lan> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Archives-Salt: 73016152-2ca7-4050-90c4-2516c8017c34 X-Archives-Hash: 17b79516d4ce16bce3fda72c08f8171a --YiEDa0DAkWCtVeE4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 01:23:59PM +0200, Ralph Sennhauser wrote: > On Tue, 28 May 2013 17:15:40 -0500 > William Hubbs wrote: >=20 > > On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 09:07:37PM +0200, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: > > > For the others, how large is the benefit of having them switchable? > > > At least some of them look like something that wouldn't hurt people > > > if it was always-built. > >=20 > > The dev manual states that use flags are to control optional > > dependencies and _settings_ which a user may reasonably want to select > > [1]. > =20 > William, each time this comes up you overred the _reasonably_. > Controlling dependencies is always reasonable but beyond that it's case > by case. Just because you can is never a valid reason. Often there are > options you clearly only want to toggle if you are a developer or > options meant for porting to alternative operating systems which lack > some bells and whistles and the like. Another example is configuring a > library for bundling with an app. The world is bigger than linux > distros. Ralph, I never said anything about disagreeing with these cases. I'm talking about purely optional features of packages which do not have any bearing on runtime dependencies or cause breakage. If a configure script offers switches for purely optional features, we should, imo, 1) give the users use flags to control these features or 2)hard code the settings we want in our ebuilds. What do you think? William --YiEDa0DAkWCtVeE4 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlGqMjIACgkQblQW9DDEZTjOAQCfVLY1MbsDfjY9sr0znK/cdcx2 4yIAn0O57ChgqNubhnALSiLPCrBof6LU =XcJV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --YiEDa0DAkWCtVeE4--