| 1 |
On Sun, Aug 2, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> This is a clean solution for developers and maintainers, but not |
| 4 |
> for ordinary users — they will confused by "qt qt4 qt5": "what is |
| 5 |
> 'qt', how is it different from 'qt4' and 'qt5'. What you are really |
| 6 |
> doing is implementing second-level USE flags, while they were |
| 7 |
> supposed to be linear. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
No argument that it isn't intuitive, but setting USE=qt and forgetting |
| 10 |
about it certainly seems more user-friendly than setting qt4/qt5 on |
| 11 |
individual packages and worrying about which is better where. To some |
| 12 |
extent the current qt policy accomplishes this, but it sacrifices |
| 13 |
control when users actually do want it. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I'm a bit torn on the issue myself, but just telling users to set |
| 16 |
USE=qt and forget about it unless you really care seems pretty simple |
| 17 |
to me. The documentation for USE=qt4/qt5 could say "this is an |
| 18 |
advanced setting for users who want to prefer the qt4 implementation |
| 19 |
over others - set USE=qt if all you care about is qt support." |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Rich |
Archives