Re[2]: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] QA Team's role

[Jakub Moc]

27.2.2006, 22:32:39, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:

> I quote the official policy:

> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=2&chap=1
>> Occasionally, ebuilds will have conflicting USE flags for
>> functionality. Checking for them and returning an error is not a
>> viable solution. Instead, you must pick one of the USE flags in
>> conflict to favour. One example comes from the msmtp ebuilds. The
>> package can use either SSL with GnuTLS, SSL with OpenSSL, or no SSL
>> at all. Because GnuTLS is more featureful than OpenSSL, it is
>> favoured:

> It's a QA violation, and not a feature as you claim.

> I find it particularly worrying that you try to pass of blatant policy
> violations as a feature. The first step in QA is detecting that there
> is a problem.

No, that's not a policy document, ebuild policy is documented here:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?style=printable&part=3&chap=1

Moreover, the cited howto is wrong, since it will break built_with_use
checks, as explained on the relevant bug and as explained here on mailing
list before. The howto also doesn't apply to cases like recode vs. mysql,
because that's a completely different functionality, you can't exactly
choose which one is better on behalf of the user.

So, to sum it up - you can't make up for portage's lack of features by
inventing a policy that doesn't work. Once again - until portage can handle
USE-based dependencies and until portage can handle conflicting use flags,
there's nothing that could be done here.


-- 
Best regards,

 Jakub Moc
 mailto:jakub@g.o
 GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E
 Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95  B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E

 ... still no signature ;)