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 AC1F3138CEF for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 07:29:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F20F9E0BB2; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 07:29:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1C5AE0B7D for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 07:29:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from shanghai.paradoxon.rec (p4FDA9AC4.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [79.218.154.196]) (using SSLv3 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: polynomial-c) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CA31633F95C; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 07:29:35 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 08:29:26 +0100 From: Lars Wendler To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: wired@gentoo.org, gnome@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: GTK USE flag situation (gtk, gtk2, gtk3; relevant to bug #420493) Message-ID: <20140212082926.4a75e2d7@shanghai.paradoxon.rec> In-Reply-To: <20140211223913.GB26141@fury> References: <20140211223913.GB26141@fury> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.3 (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-sha512; boundary="Sig_/Mnbt0EM9ysAH1xgsRCTHzjQ"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 713f1e20-8c4c-4583-b406-c16ad1d057ea X-Archives-Hash: 687eb2357eb93e61d593e5c7e2a4fc7b --Sig_/Mnbt0EM9ysAH1xgsRCTHzjQ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On Wed, 12 Feb 2014 00:39:14 +0200 Alex Alexander wrote: >Hello fellow developers, > >In the first meeting of the new QA team, we discussed the state of the >gtk{,2,3} USE flags in the main tree. [0] > >In its current state, USE=3D"gtk" means gtk2. The Gnome team is trying >to change this into "the most recent gtk version" (it is a work in >progress). > >Unfortunately, the concurrent nature of gtk2/gtk3 has resulted in >packages that may support either or both the toolkits. To handle this, >a few developers have introduced the "gtk3" useflag, that prefers gtk3 >over gtk2 when both toolkit versions are supported. At this point, the >Gnome team highly recommends prefering gtk3 if possible, skipping the >useflag altogether. [1] > >Some developers choose to follow the Gnome team's highlights, while >others choose to go their own way. The QA team would like to establish >a guideline that solves this problem in the best way possible. > >During our discussion, it was pointed out that keeping a generic >USE=3D"gtk" is sub-optimal. The non-straightforward nature of new >toolkit versions makes transitioning from one to the other a slow, >tedius process and we think that a non-versioned USE flag makes things >even worse. > >A few of our members recommended a move away from the unversioned >USE=3D"gtk" to versioned-only USE flags. Qt managed to do this quite >successfully when they transitioned from the unversioned >USE=3D"qt" (that actually meant qt3) to USE=3D"qt4". The benefits can be >seen now that qt5 is around the corner. USE=3D"qt5" is straightforward, >does not mess with qt4 packages and was introduced to the tree without >messing with current packages too much - other than adding a new use >flag where appropriate. There is also no need for USE=3D"qt" anymore. > >To achieve this, version 3 of gtk should always be enabled by >USE=3D"gtk3". At some point in the future, when gtk2 consumers reach >zero, we will retire "gtk" for good. Then, if some day gtk4 comes >around, we will be able to introduce support for it in the tree by >simply adding USE=3D"gtk4", without having to re-structure half the tree. > >We are reaching out to the developer community to hear your thoughts >and ideas on the matter. We would like to reach a decision that could >possibly affect and direct the state of whole tree. This decision >could then be turned into a policy, improving Gentoo's consistency >across the tree. > >Cheers > >[0] >https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Quality_Assurance/Meeting_Summaries#S= ummary_of_Wednesday_January_29.2C_2014 >[1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Gnome_Team_Policies#gtk3 This is a really good idea and I am all in favor of it. gtk+:3 still isn't adopted widely and there are still not many good looking skins available for it. (sorry but I don't want to have all gtk+ apps I am using looking totally ugly again) I doubt gtk+:2 will be deprecated that soon as some of our devs try to imply. --=20 Lars Wendler Gentoo package maintainer GPG: 4DD8 C47C CDFA 5295 E1A6 3FC8 F696 74AB 981C A6FC --Sig_/Mnbt0EM9ysAH1xgsRCTHzjQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJS+yLcAAoJEPiazRVxLXTFidIP/ihgEX5w9sXr12o8THd/VZXE a/PrFWkfa0y/s3qojiUWVRix3mbgPzZIM3LAQVsjjxED3o50qjhHspxXw5KVM+L5 y1PzbSAKq8mvKCw67R55ovg5nhk8jonYUGyRp+xf3uHTfXAFebseM5jIFDW6N8m7 cVr4BJYB86OEl8Sczdoc9TVLugFeFuWk7x9rZayIIrE1M348Ihpe7he5iEoKoWBd mwBhSUGQz44U0Gyw18MrgnmfAb8RIbdojSpN7H2x2ApOqeaS2MAoNl14bAB1vyLz wSmj4I9rVqvJJLsBiluVqMeh3zFlxzFV30eQtKzMvcXlhzijp26pkPdAcF6gqRW9 K1ll2wbzZe6UIDkXxNWSmQrSlixHwhGhd4LIEHkffz7sReETzneR/Vq8+noF5EvV 6MROp5rSsw8ZaP/7GMsZU4RPEFZTNRn7cE9jlODq3z0a7v9TLsoXrCOH9r7XsV58 czvy+jPqiX/T0KBQltx1aPMc0OyqF8jJZ5mo826zdpuHhlNls0uE9c1ICuwhr/Bl Bny0fUrKQuJV/kwikpYhBHZE3PVrs9rc4zxiJqmtoR2Lowme13XqRY5IxKJ542Nf 1/XgQdz/TN2Ri7dbCvSRgb27hlrsJg5TdkCbHvFc0Ph/TdyLJzkWP/50uKm1EYnX jIzDykx3WAlDX29UtmHh =xmS4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/Mnbt0EM9ysAH1xgsRCTHzjQ--