On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 5:57 AM, Michael Orlitzky <m...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On 08/12/2017 03:03 AM, Michał Górny wrote: >> >> Please provide some examples of recent in-place USE changes that benefit >> from revbumps. >> > > There is no single example. Things only get simpler if *all* USE changes > come with a new revision. >
My gut feeling is that the change you want is probably a good thing, but it will never happen if you can't provide a single example of something bad happening due to the lack of a revbump. The easy counter-argument to your suggestion is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." As others have pointed out, the portage flags are useful even if we make this change, so they're not going away. Also, I don't see any portage maintainers saying that they want this change, or that they'll remove any code if this change is made. The only potential benefit I see is QA. However, I've been running with --changed-use for eons (and was running with --newuse before that) so I couldn't tell you what happens in practice when you don't use those settings. This policy change would make my life easier, because for big packages it would encourage maintainers to not make IUSE changes until they do revbumps, which would save me a build. I'm running on relatively old hardware at this point so these rebuilds actually do cost me quite a bit of time. I'm not sure that not using --changed-use is a great option though as it will make it that much harder to keep things consistent when I do modify my package.use/make.conf. -- Rich
