| 1 |
On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Sergey Popov <pinkbyte@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> <qa team lead hat> |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> In short - apropriate REQUIRED_USE with setting recommended |
| 5 |
> USE-flag(e.g. USE="+qt4 qt5" or USE="qt4 +qt5") |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> </qa team lead hat> |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> That's most painless decision for both developers and users. Developers |
| 10 |
> do not need to maintain ugly dependencies like |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> DEPEND="qt4 ? ( |
| 13 |
> qt5 ( dev-qt/qtcore:5 ) |
| 14 |
> !qt5 ( dev-qt/qtcore:4 ) |
| 15 |
> ) |
| 16 |
> ... |
| 17 |
> " |
| 18 |
> and other mess. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> </qa team lead hat> |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Users will have default behaviour for empty make.conf. If they adjust |
| 23 |
> they make.conf to globally include/exclude some Qt-related USEs - they |
| 24 |
> are already moving from default and that's why - they can add apropriate |
| 25 |
> options to package.use |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Sergey, |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
It seems you completely ignored the discussion that took place in this |
| 31 |
thread (and I also think you misunderstood the scenario judging from |
| 32 |
the example you gave). Therefore I'm sorry but I will ignore your |
| 33 |
opinion as QA team lead. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Thanks, |
| 36 |
Davide |
Archives