1 |
Dnia 2014-02-12, o godz. 00:39:14 |
2 |
Alex Alexander <wired@g.o> napisał(a): |
3 |
|
4 |
> Some developers choose to follow the Gnome team's highlights, while others |
5 |
> choose to go their own way. The QA team would like to establish a guideline |
6 |
> that solves this problem in the best way possible. |
7 |
|
8 |
First of all, I think that the policy on a flag related to GTK+ should |
9 |
be set by the GTK+ maintainer, that is the GNOME team, and not directly |
10 |
by QA. |
11 |
|
12 |
If people dislike the policy set by GNOME, they can appeal to QA, sure. |
13 |
But IMO afterwards QA should either give their blessing to the current |
14 |
GNOME policy or tell GNOME to change the policy, not step in front of |
15 |
them with a 'higher instance override'. |
16 |
|
17 |
> During our discussion, it was pointed out that keeping a generic USE="gtk" is |
18 |
> sub-optimal. The non-straightforward nature of new toolkit versions makes |
19 |
> transitioning from one to the other a slow, tedius process and we think that a |
20 |
> non-versioned USE flag makes things even worse. |
21 |
|
22 |
How does the flag exactly do that? I don't seem to get the point |
23 |
in that paragraph. |
24 |
|
25 |
> To achieve this, version 3 of gtk should always be enabled by USE="gtk3". At |
26 |
> some point in the future, when gtk2 consumers reach zero, we will retire "gtk" |
27 |
> for good. Then, if some day gtk4 comes around, we will be able to introduce |
28 |
> support for it in the tree by simply adding USE="gtk4", without having to |
29 |
> re-structure half the tree. |
30 |
|
31 |
This goes exactly against the policy that is being established e.g. for |
32 |
USE=ssl. If QA is really supposed to set a policy here, it should set |
33 |
a generic policy for all those cases. |
34 |
|
35 |
USE flags should represent *features*, not tools used to implement |
36 |
them. If users want SSL support in an application, they want to set |
37 |
USE=ssl and stop caring. Not look through all the USE flags in case |
38 |
application used USE=openssl, USE=gnutls, USE=polarssl etc. for it. |
39 |
|
40 |
Multiple USE flags make sense when there's support for multiple |
41 |
toolkits that works and is maintained, and the user may reasonably want |
42 |
to switch between them. But then, the extra USE flags for toolkit |
43 |
switching should be introduced with keeping USE=ssl as the generic |
44 |
on/off switch and the specific flags an optional implementation switch |
45 |
for power users. |
46 |
|
47 |
In the end, GTK+ is much the same. You want GTK+ GUI, you enable |
48 |
USE=gtk. You need specific switching between 2 and 3, assuming it is |
49 |
*reasonable and well supported*, you can use extra USE=gtk2 or |
50 |
USE=gtk3. This generally works, and causes issues mostly to complainers |
51 |
alike 'I dislike this, I want to be able to easily mask it all'. |
52 |
I don't think there's a point messing up the general case for the sake |
53 |
of complainers that will either end up enabling USE=gtk3 anyway at some |
54 |
point or end up without a GUI. |
55 |
|
56 |
That said, I'm all for killing most of USE=gtk, USE=wxwidgets, USE=qt* |
57 |
occurrences with a generic USE=gui following the earlier principle. |
58 |
If user installs an application and wants a GUI for it, shklee |
59 |
shouldn't have to care whether it's GTK+, wxWidgets or Qt. Gentoo |
60 |
should be a distribution friendly to all toolkits, people who collect |
61 |
applications specific to a single toolkit belong in {,k,x}ubuntu. |
62 |
Then, the special USE flags make sense for fine-picking one |
63 |
of the toolkits when multiple are supported. |
64 |
|
65 |
-- |
66 |
Best regards, |
67 |
Michał Górny |