Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: USE flag documentation

2008-01-16 Thread Donnie Berkholz
On 18:45 Tue 15 Jan , Alec Warner wrote:
 On 1/15/08, Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 17:00 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
   My expectation is that `grep flag use.local.desc` will give me a
   list of packages using that flag (or having it in the description),
   one per line. Putting paragraphs in there doesn't seem right.
 
  A single long line still fills this requirement for us.  However, it
  does bring up the point.  Why even have use.local.desc (or
  metadata.xml's use tag) at all?  Is there really a need for a *global*
  list of flags that are ebuild-specific?  (I don't care or have much
  opinion, either way, I'm merely presenting some topic for discussion on
  this.)
 
 The global use.* files are convenient because it means we don't need
 to generate or push a cache for the data (like for metadata).  If it
 was per package or per-ebuild we would need to generate a cache to
 answer queries like 'what does the foo flag do'.

Since Chris only mentioned use.local.desc, I'm assuming he only meant 
local flags rather than use.desc also. In that case, asking what the 
foo local flag does doesn't make sense, because it does something 
different depending on the package you're curious about. Centralizing 
what feels like inherently local data seems odd to me. USE flag editors 
would still need to generate a complete list, though, so this would make 
more work for them.

Chris, I'm not entirely clear what you meant by your suggestion of also 
dropping metadata.xml use; where would we describe local flags?

Thanks,
Donnie
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: USE flag documentation

2008-01-15 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 17:00 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
 My expectation is that `grep flag use.local.desc` will give me a
 list of packages using that flag (or having it in the description),
 one per line. Putting paragraphs in there doesn't seem right.

A single long line still fills this requirement for us.  However, it
does bring up the point.  Why even have use.local.desc (or
metadata.xml's use tag) at all?  Is there really a need for a *global*
list of flags that are ebuild-specific?  (I don't care or have much
opinion, either way, I'm merely presenting some topic for discussion on
this.)

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering Strategic Lead
Games Developer


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: USE flag documentation

2008-01-15 Thread Alec Warner
On 1/15/08, Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 17:00 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
  My expectation is that `grep flag use.local.desc` will give me a
  list of packages using that flag (or having it in the description),
  one per line. Putting paragraphs in there doesn't seem right.

 A single long line still fills this requirement for us.  However, it
 does bring up the point.  Why even have use.local.desc (or
 metadata.xml's use tag) at all?  Is there really a need for a *global*
 list of flags that are ebuild-specific?  (I don't care or have much
 opinion, either way, I'm merely presenting some topic for discussion on
 this.)

The global use.* files are convenient because it means we don't need
to generate or push a cache for the data (like for metadata).  If it
was per package or per-ebuild we would need to generate a cache to
answer queries like 'what does the foo flag do'.


 --
 Chris Gianelloni
 Release Engineering Strategic Lead
 Games Developer


-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: USE flag documentation

2008-01-15 Thread Mark Loeser
Ryan Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
 Mark Loeser wrote:
 Ryan Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
 c) Allow flags from use.desc to also exist in use.local.desc.  In the 
 case that a flag for a package exists in both, the use.local.desc 
 description overrides the use.desc one.  This allows a more specific 
 per-package description of global flags.
 Still doing alright :)
 d) Allow long descriptions in a package's metadata.xml, as some have 
 begun to do already, for cases where more info is needed.  For example 
 I'd like to explain exactly what the bindist flag on freetype does and 
 what legal implications disabling it can have.
 Why can't this be done in use.local.desc?

 My expectation is that `grep flag use.local.desc` will give me a list of 
 packages using that flag (or having it in the description), one per line. 
 Putting paragraphs in there doesn't seem right.

One could argue that you can't do that currently for DEPEND strings and
such, so that seems like a possibly weak argument to me.  Just because
you can do something right now doesn't mean it was meant to be that way,
or shouldn't be changed to make things better :)

Either way, I would prefer (and I'm sure others will as well since it
will cut down on confusion) if we pick either use.local.desc or to move
them into metadata.xml.  Having it possibly be in both places just seems
silly.

-- 
Mark Loeser
email -   halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
email -   mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web   -   http://www.halcy0n.com


pgpKNKGoZLuMg.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: USE flag documentation

2008-01-14 Thread Vlastimil Babka

Ryan Hill wrote:

What do people think of this?

a) Keep use.desc as it is:  a list of common flags and a short general 
description of their meaning.


Good.

b) Keep use.local.desc as it is: a list of per-package flags that are 
specific to one to a few ebuilds (i think 5 is the number though i think 
10 is more appropriate, but that's not relevant to this discussion).  
Again, each has a short description.


c) Allow flags from use.desc to also exist in use.local.desc.  In the 
case that a flag for a package exists in both, the use.local.desc 
description overrides the use.desc one.  This allows a more specific 
per-package description of global flags.


Good.

d) Allow long descriptions in a package's metadata.xml, as some have 
begun to do already, for cases where more info is needed.  For example 
I'd like to explain exactly what the bindist flag on freetype does and 
what legal implications disabling it can have.


Right. Also why not also add short descriptions there, and deprecate 
use.local.desc when tools are converted? Placing package-local info to 
global files (when not needed to distinguish profiles as with 
package.use.mask etc) is icky.
Note that the metadata.xml should be able to record per-version 
differences somehow.


On the other hand, if there are any far-reaching changes we need made to 
the USE flag system - any features we wish we had or misfeatures we wish 
we didn't - now would be a good time to address them.


I wish for use deps :P
Well, addressing conflicts and implications between flags at ebuild/PM 
level would be also nice, but really shouldn't affect the way 
documentation is handled, IMHO.


VB
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: USE flag documentation

2008-01-14 Thread Mark Loeser
Ryan Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
 a) Keep use.desc as it is:  a list of common flags and a short general 
 description of their meaning.

Sounds good.

 b) Keep use.local.desc as it is: a list of per-package flags that are 
 specific to one to a few ebuilds (i think 5 is the number though i think 10 
 is more appropriate, but that's not relevant to this discussion).  Again, 
 each has a short description.

Also fine.

 c) Allow flags from use.desc to also exist in use.local.desc.  In the case 
 that a flag for a package exists in both, the use.local.desc description 
 overrides the use.desc one.  This allows a more specific per-package 
 description of global flags.

Still doing alright :)

 d) Allow long descriptions in a package's metadata.xml, as some have begun 
 to do already, for cases where more info is needed.  For example I'd like 
 to explain exactly what the bindist flag on freetype does and what legal 
 implications disabling it can have.

Why can't this be done in use.local.desc?

-- 
Mark Loeser
email -   halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
email -   mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web   -   http://www.halcy0n.com


pgpty7jvR7m5f.pgp
Description: PGP signature