-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 09/09/15 11:48 AM, hasufell wrote: > On 09/09/2015 05:40 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: >> >> [ Snip list ] >> > > There was a tracker on bugzilla about it at some point, but > people didn't care enough, so I stopped filing bugs. Neither the > gnome team nor QA had a strong enough opinion to enforce > consistency here over the whole tree. >
Right... So, back to the issue at hand. If a package -always- depends on a gtk (usually gtk2), but can optionally be configured to depend on gtk3 instead (and it should be optional because support isn't clearly stable yet), what's the solution here? IUSE="gtk" isn't appropriate because that's meant for enabling optional gtk support, not choosing -which- gtk to support when there always needs to be one. IUSE="gtk3" to me fits well in this case but it's also reportedly forbidden... IUSE="experimental-gtk3-support" seems less than optimal but if we (chromium, mozilla teams) have to go that route I guess we will.. The wiki seems to say that we as rdep maintainers should choose one and stick with it, but as a mozilla package maintainer, I don't want to force the entire user base to using one or the other (at least not yet), given firefox -just- got (that is, will get in two version bumps) gtk3 support that's considered stable enough for use outside of development. I don't suppose we as a community can revisit the decision to ban IUSE="gtk3" as a flag to toggle between gtk2 and gtk3 support, when one or the other is -required- by a package? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iF4EAREIAAYFAlXwWuYACgkQAJxUfCtlWe25WwD/b8ozgV4zHLyNrIzYI+Cu79+l gBORP+1q6EMUWyuyVewBAIE3nNFow+XeN67pH4pT6gqQqBJ27VH+bAt9nTprs0pi =HWeR -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
