On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 12:43:17 -0700, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
<phajdan...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 7/13/10 12:32 PM, Jeremy Olexa wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 19:25:51 +0000 (UTC), "Kacper Kowalik (xarthisius)"
>> <xarthis...@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>     if use doc; then
>>>             insinto /usr/share/doc/${PF}
>>>             doins doc/*.pdf || die
>> An open question to all:
>> Should we be hiding pdf's behind USE=doc?? I've seen it here and there
>> as of late. I thought USE=doc was for compiling docs and/or pulling in
>> extra deps to build docs.
> In my opinion we're never going to have 100% consistency here. I'd say
> let everybody implement it in a way one thinks is the best.

I will highly disagree with this statement. If *WE* are not consistent,
how do the users of the distro know what to expect? Why does this USE
flag have a different standard then the rest?
> The description of the flag is "Adds extra documentation (API, Javadoc,
> etc)". So if something is an extra documentation, it seems to be fine to
> "hide" it behind USE=doc.
> And I'd prefer to keep the meaning of "extra documentation" flexible and
> open to interpretation, just because there is no obvious benefit to aim
> for 100% consistency here, and overstandardization would be bad.

No obvious benefit besides being consistent to our userbase. Do our
users expect non-consistent USE flags? That sounds bad to me. Sadly, I
think this is a subject that we will never get a consensus on. Maybe
description should be changed to:

global:doc: Adds extra documentation (API, Javadoc, PDFs at
maintainer's discretion, etc)


Reply via email to