From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1RHyZG-0006Dw-In for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2011 13:58:26 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2E64221C362; Sun, 23 Oct 2011 13:58:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bw0-f53.google.com (mail-bw0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B55621C35E for ; Sun, 23 Oct 2011 13:57:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bke11 with SMTP id 11so8673444bke.40 for ; Sun, 23 Oct 2011 06:57:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=U6XOy809NPcjWsz7SShzYLqzPWlfgkMtPWNe9Xqpvbk=; b=M/10OqDKFf70kBRuFsdbu9XEPUrenJBiXDKXgxXGZ9g2UOHfLiveQwM966qsGPk7Q6 dkdDNt8GZt5GNTvD7QGKrD171qY+J4xb4yFs7zf+41MDI1DFnyaN36QmgigtGamhvDHx CSto/jAkonB+kfDYbPqPI92uns+uUnM4Q2wSM= 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 Received: by 10.204.157.131 with SMTP id b3mr14715569bkx.41.1319378271167; Sun, 23 Oct 2011 06:57:51 -0700 (PDT) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.204.56.65 with HTTP; Sun, 23 Oct 2011 06:57:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4EA417E6.1030009@gentoo.org> References: <20111023120055.76C302004B@flycatcher.gentoo.org> <4EA40AED.2070600@gentoo.org> <4EA417E6.1030009@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 09:57:51 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: x3XTpAU0xiFYWnhO0mzQXP3RMGY Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in media-sound/cdparanoia: ChangeLog cdparanoia-3.10.2-r3.ebuild From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: dab8f93af5d6dab28a3340decaf7cdbd On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote: > > If you only wanted to remove these files, you are free to use > INSTALL_MASK locally instead of downgrading the quality of tree. How is this a quality issue? Why do we have a static-libs USE flag is packages can't use it to determine whether the package installs static libs? It seems like this is only a "quality" issue in some aesthetic sense of the word. From an end-user point of view not installing the files or not building them are the same thing, unless you're talking about CPU time and tmp space usage. Now, if the time to build those files was actually significant then I could see an argument here, although you haven't actually proposed an alternative that addresses this. This doesn't really impact me much personally, but it just seems like we nitpick stuff like this way too much when the goal should be things that work. By all means improve on things, but we shouldn't just be reverting them. Now, if in the course of making a minor change like this the committer also rewrote half the ebuild which is something the maintainer has to deal with that a fly-by-night visitor doesn't then I could see more of an issue. I don't really see this as creating any kind of maintenance burden. Rich