On Saturday 07 of May 2011 01:18:57 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: > On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 11:34 PM, Maciej Mrozowski <reave...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Friday 06 of May 2011 15:18:20 Marijn wrote: > >> And what happened to the proposed description: > >> > >> introspection: Add gobject-introspection support, allowing for the > >> dynamic generation of bindings for various languages > > > > No. > > > > http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org/msg40069.html > > It's things like this that convinced us that there's no real advantage > in having it as a global use-flag. Maybe 3 years later when there is > *still* nothing else in the tree that uses "introspection" besides > gobject-introspection, we'll revisit this and finally make it a global > use-flag.
Nirbheek... and what's particularly wrong with 'introspection' global USE flag
having implementation-agnostic "Enable runtime API introspection" description?
Nobody sees anything wrong with overly vague 'xml' global USE flag and my
proposition isn't worse ('Add support for XML files' ... you mean what
support? import/export or just expat vs libxml2?)
--
regards
MM
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
