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 D471A138247 for ; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 21:28:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B2E31E0A99; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 21:28:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from georges.telenet-ops.be (georges.telenet-ops.be [195.130.137.68]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 894E8E0A7D for ; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 21:28:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TOMWIJ-GENTOO ([94.226.55.127]) by georges.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id pxU71m00C2khLEN06xU7XR; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 22:28:07 +0100 Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 22:27:11 +0100 From: Tom Wijsman To: peter@stuge.se Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Please consider removing use.stable.mask and package.use.stable.mask Message-ID: <20131115222711.45f706cb@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> In-Reply-To: <20131115210904.7385.qmail@stuge.se> References: <20131115210033.4fee8516@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20131115215333.4db15ea8@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20131115210904.7385.qmail@stuge.se> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0 (GTK+ 2.24.22; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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; boundary="Sig_/6aeocn5o2WG4HWR9FWT1ZwA"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: fb038a53-8db4-4dc2-b328-bc528dc70a3e X-Archives-Hash: f3b25363f1c7ac0dabcf6914a93555d1 --Sig_/6aeocn5o2WG4HWR9FWT1ZwA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 15 Nov 2013 22:09:04 +0100 Peter Stuge wrote: > Tom Wijsman wrote: > > Does replacing this "explicit behavior" by "implicit behavior" make > > sense for the users in general? >=20 > Please don't warp the words. Maybe I misunderstand, but it seems like > that's what you're doing. >=20 > I'll try to clarify: >=20 > With explicit I was refering to allowing manual setting and unsetting > of USE flags, keywords and masks. >=20 > With implicit I was refering to those same things happening > automatically. USE flags set or unset automatically, keywords set or > unset automatically, masks set or unset automatically - as a result > of something or other. >=20 > Any such automations significantly diminish the value of the explicit > knobs and are counter-intuitive. "implicit" in the context of this sub thread is it being present as part of another choice, whereas "explicit" makes it a separate choice. Currently the behavior is explicit because you have to break the dependency cycle yourself and decide how to, whereas making it implicit would solve it; in one or another particular way you'd be unaware of. > If someone is given a mechanism to control which USE flags are set or > unset then it's just stupid to go "around" those settings. This example was about a circular dependency, not about USE flags. > I understand the temptation to make things happen automatically for > ease of development, and that is perfectly fine as long as those > automations aren't exposed to users. And that's the question, it is the hard part of figuring it out... :) (To be clear: In the context of the sub thread answering the example.) --=20 With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : TomWij@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D --Sig_/6aeocn5o2WG4HWR9FWT1ZwA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJShpGvAAoJEJWyH81tNOV91WUH/1NOOd94lCPozMIuaLHBIhyh 6MAXsbXmnPBFl9JUopJpdEvEPha8DOPozDmtXW6bzbdpVfTEvXbDZNtH1eJ6z+5C BVSf5ZFrACDOntzPQdG+oeIi2diLrP//i6exowREpKSkEDgXgZ5txqfJw9wP0hpJ hgJFnlp2baGE5XWkEk4LGE5itvW2U28mu6Bs4oBJGvBquah21rud+edQ53osbrCa l7FkvTFzrLzih7XnNo/YcStZlzkcUtGibZ0kjoS2a57vqOR9y9BtfyYTp+GBkVrT 91nlnFVwEvUOHWCS5rLqFdP8hXrxnMW9zhlEnJWqXRGHbmJRfmPvFBbJzNO8kK4= =gZaL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/6aeocn5o2WG4HWR9FWT1ZwA--