| 1 |
On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 01:40:36 +0200 |
| 2 |
Vlastimil Babka <caster@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> Doug Goldstein wrote: |
| 4 |
> > An clearly motivation explanation that I didn't add, which I'm |
| 5 |
> > going to add once I send this is the fact that as per the QA |
| 6 |
> > Project, use.local.desc can not contain a USE flag that already |
| 7 |
> > appears globally in use.desc. This would allow a description for |
| 8 |
> > that USE flag to be contained in the metadata. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> What reason does the QA Project have to disallow such thing? Is it |
| 11 |
> just so that package-specific info does not concentrate in one huge |
| 12 |
> file? Or is it the danger that the meaning of package-specific flags |
| 13 |
> would drift too far from the global flag's meaning and lead to |
| 14 |
> confusion? If it's the first, then metadata.xml seems like a good |
| 15 |
> place. If the latter, then it wouldn't make much sense to approve the |
| 16 |
> syntax and then disallowing it by QA :) |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
As I recall, the logic was that global use flags have a single, well |
| 19 |
defined global meaning. Using use.local.desc for *refinements* wouldn't |
| 20 |
go against that, but it's a fairly badly defined line. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives