On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 18:58 -0800, Drake Wyrm wrote: > Lares Moreau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > media-gfx/graphicsmagick:gs - enable ghostscript support > > media-gfx/imagemagick:gs - enable ghostscript support > > media-libs/urt:gs - Add support for postscript > > > > Looking in these ebuilds, all: > > gs? ( virtual/ghostscript ) > > For how many of these might it make sense to use "ps - enable postscript > support" rather than "gs - enable ghostscript support"? If I understand > correctly, the consensus is that use flags should reflect the capability > enabled rather than the name of the library or package which provides > that capability.
In doing some poking around and talking to a couple more devs, It seems that the _unofficial_ consensus is that there be 5 or more packages that use a particular flag before it is to move to global. There are exception as always. Previously there has been great debate about where the proverbial line is. Wherever the line, it must be posted to -dev before the flag is committed to global. And as for the flag reflecting the capability, you are absolutely correct. The urt package seems to have mislabelled the entry in use.local.desc. I'm just letting this global use die a quiet death. -- Lares Moreau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | LRU: 400755 http://counter.li.org lares/irc.freenode.net | Gentoo x86 Arch Tester | ::0 Alberta, Canada Public Key: 0D46BB6E @ subkeys.pgp.net | Encrypted Mail Preferred Key fingerprint = 0CA3 E40D F897 7709 3628 C5D4 7D94 483E 0D46 BB6E
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
