On 21/11/19 21:53, Dennis Schridde wrote: > On Donnerstag, 21. November 2019 09:11:46 CET Mart Raudsepp wrote: >> See also this related old thread: >> https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/e04f6d321e424a237af62721d1d09 >> 211 > I think tackling the triad of opengl/gles, egl/glx, X/wayland is also a good > idea. Generally, all these probably have to distinguish between "support for > XYZ" and "use only XYZ", the latter hopefully being the exception, so that the > former can take the shorter use-flag. That's what I don't like about the > proposal from 2018: Globally enabling USE=gles will have different effects on > different packages. That's also what I like about the recent proposal: The > flags are more explicit. > > --Dennis I don't think the problem is so much in the principle of making a change, or even the specifics of any particular permutation of change, it's who gets to manage and implement the change in a maintainable fashion, and who has to deal with the fallout of any changes occurring where a particular scenario 'slips through the net'....
If you can convince the latter people that there is no problem arising from making said changes, and you ensure that there genuinely *is* minimal impact (by whatever means) then you stand a much better chance of this change actually being implemented ..
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
