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 63C31138247 for ; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 14:54:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 90721E0B29; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 14:54:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 84EAEE0AC5 for ; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 14:54:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [141.44.72.181] (fma181.math.uni-magdeburg.de [141.44.72.181]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: tomka) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5359733F313 for ; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 14:54:06 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <528392DD.4060208@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:55:25 +0100 From: Thomas Kahle User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Please consider removing use.stable.mask and package.use.stable.mask References: <20131113123953.623ac06d@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <52837DB7.90805@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="00VNt1aS6DCpaxAEfG7Ul2PCWqahmlxvk" X-Archives-Salt: c38cc269-2085-4123-8f3d-ce9f4160b458 X-Archives-Hash: 7aa5d6e6caa1cc994bd09301eaf038fe This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --00VNt1aS6DCpaxAEfG7Ul2PCWqahmlxvk Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 11/13/2013 03:30 PM, Duncan wrote: > Rich Freeman posted on Wed, 13 Nov 2013 08:37:51 -0500 as excerpted: >=20 >> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 8:25 AM, Thomas Kahle wrote= : >>> On 11/13/2013 12:39 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote: >>>> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 10:28:02 +0000 (UTC) >>>> Martin Vaeth wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hello. >>>>> >>>>> The new "features" use.stable.mask and package.use.stable.mask have= >>>>> turned maintaining systems with mixed ARCH and ~ARCH keywords into = a >>>>> nightmare: >>>> >>>> They are considered unsupported by many; so, going down that path yo= u >>>> need to be acquainted with Portage enough to keep a consistent syste= m. >>> >>> This argument has come up several times, but is it valid? >> >> Honestly, opinions vary on this one and I don't think it is a producti= ve >> path to go down. I also feel that being able to mix keywords is a big= >> benefit of using Gentoo. I'd rather focus on practical ways to make >> this easier rather than whether it is desirable. >> >> That said, there are always going to be situations where mixing keywor= ds >> isn't practical. You're not going to run stable chromium against ~arc= h >> v8, or mixed keywords between kdelibs and kwin, etc. >=20 > FWIW, I believe at least part of the confusion here is based on differi= ng=20 > definitions of "supported". I agree. Generally however, we should think Gentoo (or the open source ecosystem) more bazaar, less cathedral. Libraries have interfaces, and they are supposed to be mixed and matched according to the interface definitions. We (Gentoo) should not think of "Gentoo stable" as a fixed product like "iOS-7". It has come a long way, but philosophically I still think of Gentoo as a kind of automated Linux-from-scratch (where you also mix and match whatever you find on the Internets). In the end it boils down to what we mean by "supported". For me "supported" does not mean "tested". As you point out, testing every combination forbids itself. Supported for me means that the argument "you mixed stable and unstable" is not per se valid. There's a huge difference between You mixed unstable firefox with stable gcc and You mixed unstable X server with stable protocols. For me mixing the trees is supported in the sense that I would apply rational judgement to bugs. If they are of the second type, it can be said in a polite way that we as Gentoo can't do anything about this combination not working. Cheers, Thomas --=20 Thomas Kahle --00VNt1aS6DCpaxAEfG7Ul2PCWqahmlxvk Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJSg5LdAAoJEDHSY8ey5xaRZc8H/2DR39uY7+vLNvfzCmGyN0Tk ptVhtZiGsN1RLLjoHssrsvI+5lQZOWjzwg0k47NXshU4K6YZ7tOJSC9CRUCLyHms 3UcVrMVvTo74la+fRI30Tfc16++3kxC/cTYlhXsHP6zSSRDSny5HY/Y8RhvJNoWa 56qDCkJjnjbFVXbDRd6KDC3eL+wmpm3gJBTp3bYMt0N07w9v9fw+btctGUzw4kB3 GCSdgbUyqdY2HGeMKkhV5gFKjUuD/Aw8AUr3TANubA8tvmVVfJaalGw8OgfxYd05 LfeIk3qRbg8ViGFRv2cHbV01Wvij+X2csX6+Gt5A+5b111t1xzcYqYvTm2P+JLA= =26gF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --00VNt1aS6DCpaxAEfG7Ul2PCWqahmlxvk--