| 1 |
Dnia 2013-06-01, o godz. 12:41:06 |
| 2 |
William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 01:23:59PM +0200, Ralph Sennhauser wrote: |
| 5 |
> > William, each time this comes up you overred the _reasonably_. |
| 6 |
> > Controlling dependencies is always reasonable but beyond that it's case |
| 7 |
> > by case. Just because you can is never a valid reason. Often there are |
| 8 |
> > options you clearly only want to toggle if you are a developer or |
| 9 |
> > options meant for porting to alternative operating systems which lack |
| 10 |
> > some bells and whistles and the like. Another example is configuring a |
| 11 |
> > library for bundling with an app. The world is bigger than linux |
| 12 |
> > distros. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Ralph, I never said anything about disagreeing with these cases. I'm |
| 15 |
> talking about purely optional features of packages which do not |
| 16 |
> have any bearing on runtime dependencies or cause breakage. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> If a configure script offers switches for purely optional features, we |
| 19 |
> should, imo, 1) give the users use flags to control these features or |
| 20 |
> 2)hard code the settings we want in our ebuilds. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> What do you think? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
That depends on a package and on the case. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
If a switch only changes the default in a config file, a flag is |
| 27 |
useless. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
If a switch toggles a feature that does not introduce additional |
| 30 |
dependencies, is small and can be toggled from within the app, a flag |
| 31 |
is useless. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
If a switch toggles a install of a tiny file which most people either |
| 34 |
want or don't care about, a flag is useless. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
Best regards, |
| 38 |
Michał Górny |
Archives