| 1 |
On 25 February 2014 11:32, Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 4 |
> Hash: SHA256 |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> On 25/02/14 11:16 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote: |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > On 25/02/14 18:12, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 9 |
> >> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Mart Raudsepp <leio@g.o> |
| 10 |
> >> wrote: |
| 11 |
> >>> We acknowledge that our policy may not have been perfect but we |
| 12 |
> >>> need time to analyze claims brought up by/to the QA team to |
| 13 |
> >>> construct a proper proposal for a better policy that would |
| 14 |
> >>> satisfy everyone; hopefully in co-operation with a QA team. |
| 15 |
> >> Is there any reason to think that this analysis will come to a |
| 16 |
> >> different conclusion? |
| 17 |
> >> |
| 18 |
> >> I don't see any concerns on the list that weren't addressed |
| 19 |
> >> already. USE=gtk2 means build gtk2 support USE=gtk3 means build |
| 20 |
> >> gtk3 support USE="gtk2 gtk3" means build support for whichever |
| 21 |
> >> version the maintainer thinks is better (which is what USE=gtk |
| 22 |
> >> meant a week ago) |
| 23 |
> > |
| 24 |
> > And how does one select 'the best supported GTK+ for this |
| 25 |
> > application, selected by the package's maintainer.' ? I want latest |
| 26 |
> > best supported GTK+ enabled for all of my packages. I can't figure |
| 27 |
> > out the USE combination from those. You can't surely assume every |
| 28 |
> > user to review every single package and decide for himself after |
| 29 |
> > reading hours, days, weeks, if not even months various package |
| 30 |
> > ChangeLogs, NEWS files, and other possible ways upstreams are |
| 31 |
> > communicating with? And how does user know of all the mail that |
| 32 |
> > goes between upstream and package maintainers about what to choose |
| 33 |
> > for distribution? |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> ...? as per above, USE="gtk2 gtk3", in make.conf. No need to read |
| 37 |
> anything or track changelogs or anything else. Enable both in the |
| 38 |
> profile (I'm guessing they'll both probably be enabled by default in |
| 39 |
> the desktop profile or a sub-profile, tbh) and you're done. |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> If you (as a user) want to experiment with the one the maintainer |
| 42 |
> DIDN'T choose, then set a single specific version for that atom in |
| 43 |
> package.use |
| 44 |
> |
| 45 |
> |
| 46 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 47 |
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) |
| 48 |
> |
| 49 |
> iF4EAREIAAYFAlMMxbYACgkQ2ugaI38ACPDzGgD/VT5trwwNgxgx6Dc1tbOHiFU+ |
| 50 |
> 3SBbtcOcxZuTKemK+PIBAJ+uJNWpOzMh+HQV166/QWribofssZF4VTdVZfd+ncMt |
| 51 |
> =qBcA |
| 52 |
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
> |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
I agree with the USE flags as described by rich0. In many cases, if a user |
| 57 |
is in a GTK2 environment (such as GNOME2, MATE, XFCE, LXDE, etc), it |
| 58 |
becomes a significant pain to make GTK3 apps look attractive. In that case, |
| 59 |
I feel the users would prefer to have the choice and would choose gtk2 over |
| 60 |
gtk3. Granted, this may be a short term fix because some apps are moving to |
| 61 |
GTK3-only, but I think the users are willing to deal with that possible |
| 62 |
annoyance to have their applications look good in their chosen environment. |
Archives