Excerpts from Angelo Arrifano's message of Tue Mar 29 17:14:48 +0200 2011: > On Ter, 2011-03-29 at 17:08 +0200, Amadeusz Żołnowski wrote: > > I'm actually describing even global USE flags in my package's > > metadata.xml if their purpose might not be clear and I'd like to > > expect that from others. It is not a problem to write one sentence > > for each flag while you already know what flag does. > > > > Maybe it should even become our policy and not just recommendation? > > Why do we have to turn everything into policies? This case would be > easily solved by making a list of use flags that we find poorly > described, then improving the description of each.
It would be hard to find good descriptions. The problem is that even if flag has similar meaning in few packages, it usually adds a bit different functionality and that difference matters. User would like to know what he/she benefits or looses with enabling/disabling the flag. It's not just a matter of one click, it at least minutes of compilation. I think it's a task to package maintainers to review if current descriptions explain what flags in their packages bring to user. -- Amadeusz Żołnowski PGP key fpr: C700 CEDE 0C18 212E 49DA 4653 F013 4531 E1DB FAB5
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
