Le vendredi 06 mai 2011 à 15:18 +0200, Marijn a écrit : > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 05/06/11 14:25, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote: > > Le vendredi 06 mai 2011 à 10:40 +0200, Marijn a écrit : > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >> Hash: SHA1 > >> > >> Dear all, > >> > >> I was just looking into the meaning of the introspection use-flag and > >> there are many ebuilds that use it so perhaps it should be globalized, > >> which would also give us a chance to improve the naming/description. > >> Current descriptions are: > >> > >> Use dev-libs/gobject-introspection for introspection > >> Enable GObject introspection. > >> > >> Currently it is hard to tell which functionality is enabled through this > >> flag and the meaning of the descriptions for when the flag is off are > >> even more unclear. Does it mean that introspection will not be used or > >> will some other way of introspection be used? Either way, perhaps the > >> people in the know could shed some light on this issue? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> Marijn > > > > See original thread on this mailing list: > > > > From: Arun Raghavan <[email protected]> > > Subject: [gentoo-dev] New global USE flag: introspection > > Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 20:12:58 +0530 (20/06/2010 16:42:58) > > Message-ID: > > <[email protected]> > > > > Thanks for the pointer![1] Having just read that discussion it seems > that even back then many developers found that the name "introspection" > is too broad/imprecise. Several alternatives were proposed, like > gintrospection, gobject-introspection, gir, api-introspection. I think > any of these would have been better than the current name.
The gnome team agreed to disagree. There is no point in renaming a flag that is widely used across gnome packages for a single common purpose and not anywhere else in the tree. All alternatives are based on a what-if but months later, what-ifs are still nowhere to be found. > And what happened to the proposed description: > > introspection: Add gobject-introspection support, allowing for the > dynamic generation of bindings for various languages > > which at least contains a hint of what the purpose is of this flag? But > maybe someone can do even better than that now that this technology has > been in use for a while? That can be applied, it would of course be easier to manage if the flag was global. -- Gilles Dartiguelongue <[email protected]> Gentoo
