Re: [gentoo-dev] special small-files USE flag without effect on dependencies: [ unicode ]

[orbea <orbea@riseup.net>]

On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 16:56:55 -0500
Eli Schwartz <eschwartz93@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2/9/24 4:25 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> > This is the part where you try to convince me that the things I want
> > are stupid. OK. I don't care. I want it off. Leave me alone :)  
> 
> 
> As evidenced by the removal of libressl and eudev, this logic is
> fallacious and wrong and not the way Gentoo is developed.

Fwiw I still use both and Gentoo removing specifically Libressl has
only been detrimental. There is a huge amount of extra and redundant
maintainer work when all of the fixes have to be applied over and over
again without changes as the main Gentoo repo gets updated. Its
relatively rare that the fixes have to be rebased or changed against
their respective upstream, but rebasing it against Gentoo is an
extremely common and tedious task.

Your argument is invalid and not appreciated.

> 
> Gentoo does indeed discuss the things that people want, and try to
> determine whether they are useful to users, whether they are a
> placebo, and whether they are maintainable or have an adverse effect
> either on users or on the effort to maintain a consistent tree.
> 
> So circling back around to the start of the thread:
> 
> > pkgcheck complains about each new version of dev-lisp/sbcl:  
> 
> It is the allegation of the QA team that the option is a lie, it
> contains no purpose or value and doesn't contribute to use choice, and
> pkgcheck is reporting the QA team's allegation.
> 
> If you wish to convince the QA team otherwise, be my guest... but I
> would personally encourage you to come up with a better argument than
> "the option makes me feel better about myself, I don't care what you
> have to say, just leave my options alone goshdarnit; I have the right
> to be stupid".
> 
> Because I don't think you're likely to convince anyone like that.
> Sorry.
> 
>