On 08/12/2017 08:29 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> 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.
> 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.
At least now you have the option to run without --changed-use if you
want. If inline IUSE changes are completely banned, you will definitely
see more pointless rebuilds on your old hardware. In my experience most
developers make a change when there's a change to be made, and don't
"save up" changes until some arbitrary delta is reached. We've already
an increase in revbumps like this in other areas where inline changes
are being discouraged.