I disagree witho you and hasufell. It *IS* users destiny if they get some stabiity issues because of their decision to have gtk2-only or gtk3-only system.
Yes, they can paste bugs about improper toolkit support. Is it bad? Rules says it should be reported upstream. And all the time Gentoo exists that worked this way. The whole point of Gentoo is to give user freedom of the choice. Freedom to decide every aspect that is possible to decide about. Freedom to use Gentoo exactly as they want, but not as "you don't need feature X, because I'm maintainer/QA and said that", like some DebUbuntu maintainers did with git or, say, ejabberd, some years ago. Any movements to the easy side of "we will not support feature X, despite upstream still support it, because feature Y is newer and shiny, and feature X can be less tested" is a big fat violation of Gentoo philosophy. And I totally agree with Rich: it is maintainer decision, if they ready to support mutiple build variants or not. And if not — it is absolutelly lawful user's right to file a bug against a package, that it has support in upstream, but has not in the Gentoo. WE HAVE NO RIGHT TO DICTATE users what they should use and what they should not. We are makers of kinda army swiss knife suite that give user possibility and instruments to make everything they want. And any tries to say "you shall use SystemD, but not sysV/openrc/upstart/whatever", or "you shall use gtk3 only", or "you shall use Qt5 only", and so on — is a CRIME against Gentoo philosophy. -- Best regards, mva
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
