| 1 |
On Thu, 2019-12-19 at 18:28 +0100, Sebastian Pipping wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hey! |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> On 19.12.19 17:03, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 6 |
> > > B) Introduce USE flag "system-expat" to CMake similar to existing |
| 7 |
> > > flag "system-jsoncpp", have it off by default, keep reminding |
| 8 |
> > > CMake upstream to update their bundle |
| 9 |
> > > |
| 10 |
> > > [..] |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > It violates the policy on bundled libraries. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Same for the dev-util/cmake-bootstrap approach, right? |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> > What's worse, the awful |
| 18 |
> > USE flags solution means that most of the Gentoo devs end up using |
| 19 |
> > bundled libraries just because people are manually required to figure |
| 20 |
> > out what to do in order to disable them. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> I didn't say that it's perfect :) It's the same approach that we have |
| 23 |
> have with the system-jsoncpp USE flag already so that was considered |
| 24 |
> good enough at some point in the past. I guess we want the same for |
| 25 |
> Expat and jsoncpp? Which alternative do you see as better than a new |
| 26 |
> flag system-expat? |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Just because someone did something crappy, it doesn't mean it was |
| 30 |
considered 'good enough'. It was just a cheap hack that someone once |
| 31 |
did just to get it over with and stop caring. Not a good solution we |
| 32 |
should keep copying. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
We have a better alternative that lets us limit the impact on the users. |
| 35 |
Why not use it? |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
Best regards, |
| 39 |
Michał Górny |
Archives