| 1 |
"Wulf C. Krueger" <philantrop@g.o> writes: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Where is the pressing need to do that? Again, which current package would |
| 4 |
> use a re-defined "css" USE flag? |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
No package would use it, and there is no _pressing_ need. I still think |
| 7 |
it's nicer to let the user understand. What if we had qt referring to |
| 8 |
quicktime, and no qt package just yet? Would it be okay for you not to |
| 9 |
be able to understand without looking up the flag if qt referred to |
| 10 |
QuickTime or TrollTech's Qt? (being all downcase helps not here, |
| 11 |
capitalisation would have helped distinguish between the two). |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> I don't think any user will expect media-video/undvd, app-cdr/k3b or |
| 14 |
> media-video/cinelerra-cvs to support cascading style sheets but rather |
| 15 |
> the other CSS stuff. :-) |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
This assumes that users know that there are _two_ CSS |
| 18 |
technologies. Which I sincerely doubt. Note that even Wikipedia defaults |
| 19 |
CSS to Cascading Style Sheet. While it can't say anything aboug Gentoo |
| 20 |
users, it says a lot on how that particular acronym is perceived among |
| 21 |
the general public. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
And I see no compelling reason to stick with a bad choice just for the |
| 24 |
sake of not renaming an USE flag, when the alternative is to actually |
| 25 |
give back sanity to the flag naming. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò |
| 29 |
http://farragut.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org/ |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives