On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Sergey Popov <pinkb...@gentoo.org> wrote: > 11.08.2015 16:30, Michael Palimaka пишет: >> >> Don't forget that as a project with no special authority, Qt's policy >> remains a suggestion for the vast majority of maintainers. If someone >> wishes to provide support for only one Qt version or abuse their users >> with REQUIRED_USE they are still free to do so. >> > > Not enforcing policies on main tree is a bad thing. If you make policy, > make other maintainers follow it. I am not against consistent policy > that ease life BOTH for developers and users.
++ I think the qt team taking the lead on this makes sense, but this is the sort of thing that just makes sense as a treewide policy. If people don't like their suggested policy they can take it to QA/council/whatever, but it makes more sense to have projects setting standards than having everybody doing their own thing. I realize this is frustrating and contentious, but I think we're better off hashing this out, and implementing something reasonable, than having a bazillion different conventions that users have to deal with. Usually I prefer maintainer autonomy, but this is just one of those times it doesn't make sense. -- Rich
