On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 22:53:10 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan <[email protected]> wrote:
> On a related note, I really like Zac's and solar's no-nonsense
> get-stuff-done-even-if-it-isn't-perfect attitude, and would love it if
> everyone else applied it as well (if they don't already). I don't care
> if the proposal is perfect; as a potential user of those features, I
> want it to be implemented in portage in a reasonable time-frame.
> 
> Over-engineering and then designing something to death is not the way
> to deliver said feature to the user. It's really stupid when the
> design document gets more attention than the implementation used by
> 90% of our users.

In that case, why would you like to see VALID_USE as well as
pkg_pretend? Why not just use pkg_pretend, which is already in EAPI 4
and which can do everything VALID_USE can do plus several useful things
that it can't?

With pkg_pretend you can do VALID_USE using a simple eclass...

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to