On 02/02/17 08:21 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 02/02/2017 06:41 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: >> Responding here instead of the first time it was posted, just 'cause. >> >> On 02/02/17 06:35 PM, james wrote: >>> " >>> I'm not saying that we should have a minimal experience out-of-the-box, >>> only that the base profile should result in an effectively-minimal set >>> of USE flags. Adding IUSE defaults is essentially adding defaults to the >>> base profile." >> >> Yes. More specifically, it's adding these defaults without setting >> the flags globally, thereby not introducing system-wide defaults >> across all packages but only those that make sense on a per-package >> basis for that package to operate properly. >> >> IMO this is the effectively minimal-set of use flags we should have. > > I... agree? We should enable the flags that are necessary for the > package to work, and we should enable whatever is necessary to avoid > REQUIRED_USE roadblocks. That's what I started out by suggesting. >
Where we disagree is that this includes all of scenarios #2, #3, and #4 IMO. #4 perhaps less so than the others, but IMO if there is a good reason feature-wise for that to be default-enabled, then the maintainer should still default-enable it and do so via IUSE-defaults. Remember one of the primary reasons IUSE-defaults came about is because maintainers were doing all of these things, but using "no*" flags so that the features would be default-enabled. I don't think any of us want to see that again.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
