On nie, 2017-07-09 at 10:29 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, 09 Jul 2017, Michał Górny wrote: > > On nie, 2017-07-09 at 09:22 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > > Second, and more important, introduction of an automatic solver > > > would inevitably lead to proliferation of REQUIRED_USE in the tree. > > > However, nothing would guarantee that the package manager on the > > > user's side is capable of solving the constraints automatically. > > > The result would be more emerge failures and asking for more > > > micro-management of flags by users. > > Think of dynamic deps. We were able to eventually contain them, and > > teach developers not to account for them even though they are still > > enabled by default, I think. > > I don't see why optional autosolving of REQUIRED_USE could not be > > contained by a policy as well. > > Then can you please confirm that the policy outlined in > https://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/use-flags/index.html#conflicting-use-flags > can stay in place indefinitely, and that your GLEP doesn't intend to > change it?
The GLEP does not mention that policy at all, so it's not affected. If we decide to change it, it will be done independently of the GLEP. > > Of course, there will be some people who will violate it but it's > > not something that doesn't happen anyway right now. > > A policy that isn't enforced is useless. Say that to the people who invented USE=gtk2,gtk3 instead of USE=gtk. Oh wait... > > Are you suggesting that we introduce half-tested feature in EAPI 7, > > then spend a few years figuring out that it doesn't work as > > expected? > > No, I am suggesting that we introduce a new package manager feature in > a well defined way, so that ebuild authors can rely on it. We have a > mechanism for that, and I don't see a good reason not to follow it. > > > Because I don't see how we get it tested properly without having > > users actually test it and report the results. > > It shouldn't be necessary for the spec to specify all details of the > algorithm. It should catch the basics though in the next EAPI, like > leftmost preferred, banning empty groups, and banning USE conditionals > inside groups. > Works for me. However, the problem is whether i'll live to see the day when I can realistically use it. python-single-r1 needs this urgently. Today. Not 15 years from now when we can drop support for EAPI <=6. Presuming Gentoo will be anything but a huge pile of defunct policies and bureaucracy 15 years from now. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
