1 |
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 06:24:51PM +0200, Thomas Sachau wrote: |
2 |
> Petteri R??ty schrieb: |
3 |
> > Thomas Sachau wrote: |
4 |
> >> In addition, i see a trend to enabled more more more USE flags (either over profiles or via IUSE |
5 |
> >> +flag). Whats the reason for forcing a big load of default enabled USE flags on every user including |
6 |
> >> more dependencies, more compile time, more wasted disk space and more possible vulnerabilities |
7 |
> >> except some users, who complain about a missing feature and are not able to think and enable a USE |
8 |
> >> flag for that feature? |
9 |
> >> |
10 |
> > |
11 |
> > One possible reason is that our packages should follow upstream policy |
12 |
> > and maybe upstreams usually like to keep things enabled rather than |
13 |
> > disabled. |
14 |
> > |
15 |
> > Regards, |
16 |
> > Petteri |
17 |
> > |
18 |
> > |
19 |
> |
20 |
> With that argument you could request to enable all useflags by default. Its ok in my eyes, if you |
21 |
> follow upstream the way tarballs are created (e.g. qt move to splitted qt packages or the other way |
22 |
> round). Something else would make maintainence part much harder. But i disagree on the part for |
23 |
> "follow upstream policy for default enabled USE flags". |
24 |
> Gentoo is about choice and i would like to have the choice to disable most USE flags by default and |
25 |
> with an easy way, e.g. by choising a profile with less default enabled USE flags. Forcing every user |
26 |
> to disable many or almost all flags independent of his profile would make Gentoo less userfriendly |
27 |
> in general without a good reason. If upstream does not want to support a disabled USE flag, they |
28 |
> should not offer the choice to disable it in the first place. |
29 |
|
30 |
I think there are two issues being put together here. One is the issue |
31 |
of profiles enabling use flags by default, and the other is packages |
32 |
enabling use flags by default in IUSE. |
33 |
|
34 |
At the package level, I do think that we should follow the upstream |
35 |
policy. Upstream giving you the option to disable something doesn't |
36 |
mean that they don't support disabling it, it just means that they are |
37 |
giving you the choice to disable it. If it is enabled by default, it |
38 |
could mean that upstream has found that most of their users prefer to |
39 |
enable it, so they set it up that way. |
40 |
|
41 |
To me, the question really is at the profile level since enabling use |
42 |
flags there has the potential to affect entire systems. I don't think |
43 |
flags should be enabled at the profile level unless we are sure that |
44 |
most users who use that profile will want the flags enabled. |
45 |
|
46 |
-- |
47 |
William Hubbs |
48 |
gentoo accessibility team lead |
49 |
williamh@g.o |