On 5 August 2015 at 03:09, Davide Pesavento <p...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 8:59 PM, Ben de Groot <yng...@gentoo.org> wrote: >> On 4 August 2015 at 04:20, Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>> [...] >>> Gentoo should be the best of both worlds. We should give users the >>> power to tweak things, but we shouldn't force them to play with config >>> files all day long just to have a functional system. If users want to >>> care we let them care instead of telling them "don't touch" like most >>> other distros, but if they don't care we still provide reasonable >>> defaults. >> >> And that is exactly what we do. The kde profile enables qt4, the >> plasma profile enables qt5, the other profiles have no qt* useflags >> enabled. These are reasonable defaults. >> > > As tetromino pointed out, this is very far from the real current situation.
Indeed, I was wrong here. We will need another solution. >> Of course some users will proceed to enable both qt4 and qt5 globally >> in their make.conf, but I don't think it is unreasonable to expect >> them to then deal with adding exceptions to package.use for those >> packages where exactly-one-of is required. >> >> In my opinion, this is the way Gentoo has always worked, and we should >> simply recommend users to only set one of the qt* useflags as globally >> enabled, if they want to prevent such micro-management. Hiding the qt4 >> option is in my opinion the wrong solution around people complaining >> after they have consciously enabled both flags. >> >> If this is not acceptable (or "absolutely unusable" as one dev put >> it), then we need a proper solution, which a) will not hide the qt4 >> option, and b) will prevent triggering required_use blockage by >> choosing qt5 over qt4 in case both are enabled, while c) informing the >> user about this. This probably requires new eclass or even EAPI >> functionality. >> > > Please go ahead and design and implement such functionality (a sort of > REQUIRED_USE defaults). Something along the lines of PYTHON_TARGETS could work. But personally, I'm happy with REQUIRED_USE. > In the meantime, we will apply the policies > written in the Qt project wiki page. Except for the one that is wrong. >> In the meantime, we should stick with the policies adopted at the qt3 >> to qt4 transition (explicit versioned useflags) and let the user deal >> with per-package management if they enable both flags. >> > > We didn't have REQUIRED_USE at the time of the qt3->qt4 transition, so > this point is completely moot. We had something worse. That didn't prevent us from using it tho. -- Cheers, Ben | yngwin Gentoo developer
