AllenJB wrote:
> Ben de Groot wrote:
>> We've been living with the 2008.0 profiles for a while now. I think the
>> time has come for 2009.0 profiles so we can have some updates. Also,
>> there are plans for an anniversary release of our LiveCD, so I think the
>> time is right to start working on a new set of profiles.
>> One reason I bring this up is that the Qt team would like to see the qt3
>> useflag dropped from desktop profiles, and I'm sure others have some
>> suggestions as well.
> Haven't the devs just been making changes directly to the profiles since
> at least autobuilds came about? I'm sure I've seen some global use flag
> changes relatively recently. What is the actual policy on this?
> It seems kind of pointless to me to tie global use flag changes to a
> release cycle when per-package use flags are now changed "on a whim"
> (with EAPI-2 style default use flags)

I think a release cycle is most useful for handling incompatible
changes. This allows us to make changes in newer releases that might
break older package managers.

>> Traditionally, the release team has taken care of this, as the profiles
>> were tied to releases of install media and stage3 archives. Now that we
>> have the autobuilds, this relationship isn't as self-evident anymore,
>> which is why I address the wider dev community.
> With the introduction of autobuilds, would it be a good idea to rename
> the profiles so that they don't have the date association? This does
> seem to confuse a number of new users who will appear asking where the
> 2009 profiles are.

Maybe, but you could also look at this as a documentation/training

> What does Gentoo use versioned profiles for now that use flag changes,
> in particular per-package use flags, don't seem to be linked at all.
> What should they be used for?

As said above, incompatible changes. However, it might be nice to
offer some unversioned profiles for power-users who update regularly
and aren't concerned about compatibility issues.

> Is this going to be another thing that isn't updated in the Handbooks?
>> Please share your ideas on this.
>> Cheers,
>> Ben


Reply via email to