| 1 |
On Sun, 2003-09-28 at 15:41, Jason Wever wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 23:24:20 +1000 |
| 3 |
> Troy Dack <tad@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> > Not everybody is a Linux boffin and Gentoo is attracting its fair share |
| 6 |
> > of Linux initiates. Having things configured so that a package works |
| 7 |
> > straight away or so that the configuration doesn't shoot users in the |
| 8 |
> > foot (or have the potential to cause grief for other users) is sensible. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> That's where a useflag could come in, for situations where devs think it |
| 11 |
> may be wise to protect users from themselves. We could then highly |
| 12 |
> suggest in the installation guides that they make use of it. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I don't think USE flags should be used here. One way should be good |
| 15 |
enough for all. If you can't justify the changes well enough, they |
| 16 |
shouldn't go in. Supporting different ebuild build 'paths' with |
| 17 |
consequent different outcomes is not an option in my opinion. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
USE flags should be switches to already existing ebuild options, making |
| 20 |
them do 'this, that and the other thing' too is confusing and solves |
| 21 |
nothing. Clarity and simplicity should be our goals. The transparency of |
| 22 |
the process is what made Gentoo attractive, I see that initial goal slip |
| 23 |
away more and more. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
- foser |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives