Re: [gentoo-dev] net-misc/strongswan USE_EXPAND

[Alexandre Rostovtsev]

On Tue, 2015-06-23 at 07:06 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2015-06-23, o godz. 01:23:13
> Jason Zaman <jason@×××××××××.com> napisał(a):
>
> > On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 10:55:45PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> > > Dnia 2015-06-22, o godz. 16:38:30
> > > Jason Zaman <perfinion@g.o> napisał(a):
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > I want to add STRONGSWAN_PLUGINS to USE_EXPAND. This is related
> > > > to bug
> > > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=504942
> > > > "net-misc/strongswan missing USE flags for plugins"
> > > >
> > > > Patrick said to fix it myself, the ebuilds with the plugins
> > > > have
> > > > been in the tree for a fair while now and only the USE_EXPAND
> > > > is
> > > > missing.
> > > >
> > > > If there are no objections, I will commit the following patch
> > > > on friday:
> > >
> > > USE_EXPAND is global by its nature. USE flags used by a single
> > > package
> > > are not appropriate for making global.
> >
> > Since when? There are so many things in USE_EXPAND that are only
> > for a
> > single package.
>
> Not sure when. But the policies about USE flags were in the devmanual
> long before I came here.
>
> > APACHE2_MODULES, NGINX_MODULES_HTTP, COLLECTD_PLUGINS, QEMU_*, etc.
> > Easily half of the things in USE_EXPAND are for only a single
> > package.
>
> Past screwups don't justify future screwups.

I don't see it as a screwup personally.

It is often useful to have different namespaces for the few general
flags that control a package's general features and the >9000 flags
that enable/disable >9000 highly specific plugins.

And if violation of the rules is useful, perhaps the rules are wrong?