| 1 |
Enrico Weigelt wrote: |
| 2 |
> * Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o> schrieb: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> <snip> |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
>>> Well, I don't consider reducing complexity "frivolous" ;-o |
| 7 |
>> Which reduction for which complexity? Do you want to bring everyone's |
| 8 |
>> systems to a grinding halt, just because you can't understand the |
| 9 |
>> "complexity" of useflags. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> I just want to keep things simple. We're talking about introducing |
| 12 |
> new (additional) logic. This has to be maintained. And it doesn't |
| 13 |
> actually *solve* the problem which is this discussion was started. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Rember: we started with the thesis, "grandma wants graphical |
| 16 |
> frontends whereever possible". This is in fact not an technical |
| 17 |
> issue, instead a matter of personal taste, or lets say, an individual |
| 18 |
> system configuration. Grandma wants to click, okay, so she should |
| 19 |
> use graphical applications. She's not interested what sits behind, |
| 20 |
> she just wants to have a buch of applications. And she also doesn't |
| 21 |
> wann have anything to do with emerge and useflags. She just wants |
| 22 |
> to have a choice between a bunch of end-user applications. |
| 23 |
> That's the job of an Grandma-(sub-)distro. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Bad example, as Gentoo generally requires knowledge of the system and |
| 27 |
the command line interface; unless you think grandma can update her |
| 28 |
toolchain properly with no issues. I don't think anyone at this point |
| 29 |
would hand Gentoo to grandma; and I don't think anyone has that goal. |
| 30 |
Mostly we just want an easy to maintain system. See that word, |
| 31 |
maintain; generally means the maintainer knows what they are doing. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
> Okay, let's say we want to intruduce an meta-useflag for "GUI" |
| 34 |
> (although having additional GUIs in the same package as the |
| 35 |
> backend isn't what I consider clean design). If there's just *one* |
| 36 |
> than it's easy - just an alias. But what's if we have more ? |
| 37 |
> Who makes the decision, which one to take ? Based on what rules ? |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
The packages maintainer for Gentoo typically makes the choice on how |
| 41 |
something is deployed in Gentoo. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
>> Useflags are one of the distinguishing features of gentoo. |
| 44 |
> |
| 45 |
> Yes. For optional features. Additional programs aren't features of |
| 46 |
> some other program, but additional programs. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
I would gather for many packages that a gui is a optional feature. |
| 49 |
Also this is not a hard and fast rule (and was never meant to be). |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
> |
| 52 |
> <snip> |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
>> It is also against the gentoo philosophy of offering software the |
| 55 |
>> way upstream provides it. |
| 56 |
> |
| 57 |
> Ah, and this philosophy is more important than quality and |
| 58 |
> maintainability ? |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
This *philosophy* is a core value of gentoo. That would be like saying |
| 61 |
we should build binary packages for everything because it's easier to |
| 62 |
maintain and gives us a higher quality distribution. |
| 63 |
|
| 64 |
Pardon my french, but fuck that. |
| 65 |
|
| 66 |
-- |
| 67 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives