| 1 |
On 09/10/2015 08:15 PM, Daniel Campbell wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> To my knowledge, the gtk3 version of spacefm *did* indeed have less |
| 4 |
> functionality, at first. I think they're mostly the same nowadays, |
| 5 |
> though. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
That's why spacefm ebuild did not switch to gtk3 when gtk3 support was |
| 8 |
still experimental. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> That said, I wasn't saying gtk3 support was lacking. But if |
| 11 |
> our package supports less things than upstreams, we're not shipping |
| 12 |
> /as complete/ a package. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
This sentiment is very confusing. Not even spacefm provides all |
| 16 |
available configure switches as USE flags and I am glad that it does not. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> tldr: If the problem is USE flags, let's talk USE flags. If it's |
| 20 |
> supporting more than one toolkit in general, I see no reason not to |
| 21 |
> let maintainers use their discretion and not force their hand in |
| 22 |
> either direction. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
We have provided several arguments here repeatedly. |
Archives