| 1 |
On 20/02/14 11:23, Steev Klimaszewski wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 03:59 -0500, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: |
| 3 |
>> And this is an example of why everyone on the gnome team doesn't like |
| 4 |
>> the "gtk3" flag. Because well-meaning developers will be looking at |
| 5 |
>> their one corner of the portage tree, deciding that they are going to |
| 6 |
>> handle the choice of gtk version without slotting, and not consider the |
| 7 |
>> effect on the distro as a whole. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> You know what's going to happen now, after the QA team decision? |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> First of all, lots of developers will start renaming "gtk" to "gtk3" in |
| 12 |
>> their ebuilds' IUSE. |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> Which means "gtk gtk3" will soon have to be added to USE in |
| 15 |
>> targets/desktop/gnome/make.defaults (currently, the gnome profile |
| 16 |
>> globally only has USE="gtk" because the "gtk3" flag is evil). |
| 17 |
>> |
| 18 |
>> And users of non-gnome profiles who use gnome applications will of |
| 19 |
>> course manually add "gtk gtk3" to USE in their local make.conf. |
| 20 |
>> |
| 21 |
>> Unfortunately, at the same time, lots of other developers are going to |
| 22 |
>> start adding support for building against gtk2 XOR gtk3. Because of |
| 23 |
>> course "Gentoo is about choice", and the more choices, the merrier, and |
| 24 |
>> the gtk3 flag has been declared as supported by the QA team. And that |
| 25 |
>> means lots of REQUIRED_USE="^^ ( gtk gtk3 )". |
| 26 |
>> |
| 27 |
>> For the gnome team this results in a headache: maintaining a big list of |
| 28 |
>> "-gtk" / "-gtk3" entries in targets/desktop/gnome/package.use so that |
| 29 |
>> gnome users get a sensible choice and don't need to edit /etc/portage/* |
| 30 |
>> just to emerge widely used desktop tools. |
| 31 |
>> |
| 32 |
>> But for non-gnome users who manually added USE=gtk3 to make.conf, this |
| 33 |
>> means regular emerge conflicts after sync, forcing them to *guess* |
| 34 |
>> whether "-gtk" or "-gtk3" in pacakge.use is the better choice. Maybe |
| 35 |
>> with portage auto-suggesting the wrong solution just to add to the |
| 36 |
>> wonderful user experience :/ |
| 37 |
>> |
| 38 |
> See, now this is an example of a good email as to why supporting both |
| 39 |
> can be a hassle for more than just one desktop. Instead of telling me |
| 40 |
> that I'm dumb for thinking it's a good idea to follow upstream's |
| 41 |
> supported ideas, and that we should force one or the other. |
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
> The KDE team seems to be able to deal with it just fine, but somehow |
| 44 |
> it's impossible and hard for the GNOME team. Why is that? What does |
| 45 |
> KDE do differently that makes it feasible? |
| 46 |
> |
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
No, they didn't manage it, at all, which why we don't see Qt3/KDE3 in |
| 50 |
tree anymore. |
Archives