Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Daniel Campbell <zlg@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] www-client/chromium gtk3 support
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 09:03:17
Message-Id: 55F298D0.7020702@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] www-client/chromium gtk3 support by Rich Freeman
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA256
3
4 On 09/10/2015 11:26 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
5 > On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 2:21 PM, hasufell <hasufell@g.o>
6 > wrote:
7 >> On 09/10/2015 08:15 PM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
8 >>>
9 >>> tldr: If the problem is USE flags, let's talk USE flags. If
10 >>> it's supporting more than one toolkit in general, I see no
11 >>> reason not to let maintainers use their discretion and not
12 >>> force their hand in either direction.
13 >>>
14 >>
15 >> We have provided several arguments here repeatedly.
16 >>
17 >
18 > Well, right now the status quo is that this is up to maintainers.
19 > There is no policy that states otherwise.
20 >
21 > The USE flag issue is on the next council agenda, though I'm not
22 > really confident that we'll resolve it in one go - there are only
23 > a few days before the meeting. If anybody has concerns about the
24 > approach that we take I'd suggest posting them on the thread, but
25 > I suspect that most likely the council will go around the circle
26 > and assess where everybody generally stands, then propose something
27 > more solid for a vote the following meeting (which gives everybody
28 > an opportunity to shoot holes it in beforehand).
29 >
30
31 Honestly, I can understand where the gnome team is coming from wrt
32 keeping things moving forward. I personally don't think highly of
33 gtk3, but in the grand scheme of things, if that's where it's going,
34 maybe we *should* establish some policy on how USE flags are named
35 and/or used. Use cases do indeed differ; sometimes it enables an
36 optional GUI, sometimes it's one of many toolkit options. Whatever
37 decision is made I'm fine with so long as I can ensure users of
38 packages I maintain can choose which toolkit the package is built with
39 (assuming upstream supports it, of course).
40
41 I like the general 'gtk' flag we generally use to choose *which*
42 toolkit, and local USE flags for specific versions, if they are
43 supported. But in that case, the general gtk flag should be
44 interpreted as the latest version supported, so users don't come
45 across weirdly behaving packages that default to gtk2 (unless that
46 version is the most stable).
47
48 It's hard to apply such standards across a tree of thousands of
49 packages, each with their own upstreams, build systems, code
50 standards, and so on. I'm sure there's something we can find that
51 enables us to continue providing choice to users while maintaining
52 some semblance of consistency across the tree.
53
54 For starters, versioned USE flags more than likely don't belong in
55 make.conf's USE variable and shouldn't be global.
56
57 - --
58 Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer
59 OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net
60 fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C 1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6
61 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
62 Version: GnuPG v2
63
64 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJV8pjLAAoJEAEkDpRQOeFwu04P/0Hypny+iEXfEnvzl5MAVb+y
65 OdpUYwhuhDq79cK5DEbs0sfc9deTYWj8PL8FOpxrSnunT6hwwesMepXQDWFInRhE
66 aF9tvTgZJG7NlW6D4vG6d2+sOluuYXqkv75vezf173k/02WD8FxVlD3dbeIOrItn
67 IH7JiBfJNzyXLgF9bjzxxV5ANe37jWf8j5ZGfvlv/NEiasM8zsDJzC0MQeEnPy6/
68 RNgjvP9U+BtWxHwLjgib6F4aYIr5aZzwa7bgbP7JGN88RPgui53LgklZjsxLh1sG
69 qXnFmInejE2gNPt2yO5yxahue2tABCKiSFiZcYyhDMyA3vW+c4Uu71szlB2iWsWG
70 ZeDG1FY5SR4nreD/Er/q5GQPuU/B32FzuJpc+e7F5uzBGVY+ZuHX9UJnFb6KFwg/
71 hxDXiVwJLoMHEMIfqk6NRI0A44aLDqJamND9Hv3D97jC1kLnu56qzhMVj+8/SQkn
72 bXPtBQJEybMIemmobtm7clnjtY2wbFo4paN269+gJkgHoKmA+FpCCDX2eBFvCl/G
73 yNkFEFwXp0SN4XaUQ3LysBlh3BZcb1grUeJKxt5punf9T6/Cc16V5jzjD7e2o/3g
74 rD/oL5ea/BEyB2QPFII7IJl8V9kjAnVSPtGhvn8UJNtLUbS3tZEtwXONwDLNQV0R
75 AD8GxhNJBRgau84x55na
76 =v5ss
77 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] www-client/chromium gtk3 support Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>