On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 8:35 AM, hasufell <hasuf...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 09/10/2015 03:10 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 8:53 AM, hasufell <hasuf...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >> > >> So we are breaking consistency and introduce maintenance and > >> configuration complexity, because we want to support a corner case that > >> isn't consistently supported anyway and will not be (because that's what > >> the gnome team said and most upstream maintainers do). > >> > >> You'd actually have to start forking upstream projects if you are > >> serious about this. > > > > Again, I'm saying that maintainers should be free to support multiple > > versions if they wish to do so. They should not be required to do so. > > And yes, I do realize that this limits options for users, but they're > > welcome to proxy-maintain packages that do support the versions they > > wish to use. If they want to fork upstream they're even welcome to do > > that, but obviously that isn't going to happen often. > > > > I just don't think we should be in the business of saying "no" here. > > Again, your proposed use case is > 1) imaginary > 2) currently impossible to support, because there are lots of > applications which either force gtk3 in the ebuild or have only gtk3 > supported upstream. It will be pretty much impossible to not have gtk3 > installed or loaded into RAM, unless you don't use a DE in the first > place and stick to terminals. > > > > >> > >> I think a lot of people just go wild when they see configure switches > >> and stuff everything into USE flags without really considering the > >> impact or the usefulness. > >> > >> It's not all about choice, it's also about sanity. > >> > > > > And again, I'm just saying to leave it up to the maintainer. > > If this affects tree consistency and usability, then it is not just up > to the maintainers. There are lots of topics where I concede that QA has a point and can utilize its influence; but 'consistency and usability' are not topics I would normally expect them to impose on developers. -A
