On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 21:44:48 -0300 (ART) Fonseca <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I believe that in the future use.desc will have no > use, mainly because all description will be available > in the ebuild file. Use.desc is relevant in most cases imho, thus i see no point in moving _all_ descriptions into ebuilds (that would be way to much duplication). In my opinion, that ebuilds or metadata extension only makes sense for special cases, to overide the common description from use.desc. Btw, in addition to doing it in metadata.xml or in ebuilds, there's a third possible implementation, that would be putting them in use.local.desc. For instance: - use.desc: dvdread - Enables usage of Ogle's libdvdread for DVD playback - use.local.desc: media-video/mplayer:dvdread - Force usage of Ogle's libdvdread \ for DVD playback instead of the Mplayer's dvdkit. Tools that display this descriptions would just have to ensure t hat they take the one from use.local.desc in priority when available. That's probably the easier solution from the "adapt existing tools" point-of-view, but has the same drawback as putting description in metadata.xml (which is "two files to edit instead of one"). I still prefer the in-ebuilds solution personnaly. -- TGL. -- [email protected] mailing list
