Re: [gentoo-dev] QA bikeshed: killing USE=dedicated in favor of uniform USE=client+server

[hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org>]

On 08/20/2015 09:32 PM, James Le Cuirot wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 20:03:26 +0200
> hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>>> As an alternative, we would use USE=client and USE=server along with
>>> proper IUSE defaults to control client & server builds
>>> appropriately. Both flags use positive logic, and REQUIRED_USE='||
>>> ( client server )' is rather clear.
>>
>> That increases the burden of managing configuration and further abuses
>> REQUIRED_USE where it wasn't meant to be used in the first place.
>>
>> USE="dedicated" has worked fine for games users and no one has ever
>> complained. In fact, it is a _very_ convenient USE flag, which means
>> "no manual fiddling, this will be dedicated for sure".
> 
> I'm don't feel very strongly about it but as someone who is considering
> working on more games in the future, I like what mgorny has suggested.
> I don't think the micro-managing argument flies so well here because
> these flags are much less common than flags like qt. client and server
> would probably be enabled by default in most cases and I doubt there
> are any games where you can't have both. If there were a conflict then
> you would want to make a concious decision as it's more significant
> than choosing a GUI toolkit.
> 

So what is the gain?

* introducing more REQUIRED_USE constraints (because you must not
disable both client and server)
* breaking existing configuration of users
* migrating a lot of ebuilds for no practical gain

Can we please have QA not dictate us how we model our USE flags? Games
_are_ consistently handled.