On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 14:49:55 -0500 Mark Loeser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > IIRC the idea behind duplication was not to use a flag for different > > purposes, but have a generic description in use.desc (like "doc: > > build additional docs") and give a more detailed description in > > use.local.desc (like "doc: build API docs and manual as pdf and > > html"). See > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.portage.devel/618 and > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/26035 for the > > original threads about this. > > In all of the examples I have seen it seems that the "more detailed > description" doesn't really give that much more useful information. > It just seems to be duplicating the same information in different > words. > > Currently the flags I found in both use.desc and use.local.desc are > exact copies, so I will talk to the maintainers for those packages > and make sure they are alright with removing their entry. For the record, I didn't look at the current cases nor do I have a positions for or against the idea, just providing some general background info. > On a more global scale, we should decide if this is valid though. I > haven't exactly been convinced that it is useful, but I'm not opposed > to the idea. I'd just like to see a decision one way or another. Yeah, unfortunately none of the people proposing the idea ever wrote a glep or even filed a bug regarding this (AFAIK), also as the quoted threads show there are a number of possible solutions for this. Marius -- Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
