| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 22/06/10 18:11, Arun Raghavan wrote: |
| 5 |
> It is not a GNOME-only flag. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
A general introspection flag may not be, but this isn't a general |
| 8 |
introspection flag, this is specific to gobject and the suggestions try |
| 9 |
to clarify that. People who want gobject-introspection (which concerns |
| 10 |
gobject, and is therefore appropriate for a "g" prefix) will not want to |
| 11 |
have to manually differentiate between arbitrary-library-introspection |
| 12 |
and gobject-introspection by fiddling around with a package.use file to |
| 13 |
individually turn it on and off. It should be an easy, global USE flag |
| 14 |
to enable once in make.conf and forget about. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> Which should not be an issue since any library that has some sort of |
| 17 |
> introspection can use this flag (and the use.desc can be changed |
| 18 |
> appropriately at that time if it does not use gobject-introspection). |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Why have to change it in the future (and probably split it into two |
| 21 |
flags then), when the choice hasn't been made yet? Or, to put your own |
| 22 |
question to you, why are you vehemently for "introspection" when others |
| 23 |
have shown concern with the choice? As far as I can see, the only |
| 24 |
difference is requiring a slightly longer use_enable line. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
In the end, it's not a big issue and whichever is chosen it'll work out. |
| 27 |
I'm just trying to figure out why the compromise solutions aren't good |
| 28 |
enough to satisfy everyone? |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Mike 5:) |
| 31 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 32 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux) |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
iEYEARECAAYFAkwhGkAACgkQu7rWomwgFXp0dQCePjaHQn6JeBO6OrzwsIHBp8f1 |
| 35 |
+2gAoJDD4MS1spuo1DiqD96uOfX8ZBj9 |
| 36 |
=TJvC |
| 37 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives