On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 07:28 -0500, Brian Harring wrote: > On Sun, Sep 18, 2005 at 03:48:43PM +0000, John N. Laliberte wrote: > > * "but you are taking away choice!" - If a program has both GTK2 and GTK3 > > interfaces, there are many ways to allow for testing of the experimental > > interface. For instance, package.mask with a revision number. > > package.mask isn't a perfect fit from where I sit; if it's already merged > (say for development), but the developer has masked gtk-3, all pkgs > that prefer gtk-3 will continue linking against it till gtk-3 is > unmerged regardless of the masking. >
For an example to illustrate what John meant by using package.mask, assuming gtk-3 is masked, and we have an appfoo with a default gtk-2 interface and an experimental gtk-3 interface. The un-package.masked ebuilds will always build against gtk-2, as that'd be the designated interface by the developer. By always build against, I mean gtk-2 would be the default interface - so it'd specify --enable-gtk2/--disable-gtk3 or explicitly not use automagic to detect gtk-3 and always use gtk-2. We could have a package.mask'ed appfoo-rX ebuild that builds with the gtk-3 interface as it becomes more mature. This is sort of an extension of "developer knows best" when choosing which gtk+ interface to make the default. Mike Gardiner (Obz) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
