On Tue, 2015-06-23 at 07:06 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > Dnia 2015-06-23, o godz. 01:23:13 > Jason Zaman <ja...@perfinion.com> napisał(a): > > > On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 10:55:45PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > > > Dnia 2015-06-22, o godz. 16:38:30 > > > Jason Zaman <perfin...@gentoo.org> napisał(a): > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > I want to add STRONGSWAN_PLUGINS to USE_EXPAND. This is related > > > > to bug > > > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=504942 > > > > "net-misc/strongswan missing USE flags for plugins" > > > > > > > > Patrick said to fix it myself, the ebuilds with the plugins > > > > have > > > > been in the tree for a fair while now and only the USE_EXPAND > > > > is > > > > missing. > > > > > > > > If there are no objections, I will commit the following patch > > > > on friday: > > > > > > USE_EXPAND is global by its nature. USE flags used by a single > > > package > > > are not appropriate for making global. > > > > Since when? There are so many things in USE_EXPAND that are only > > for a > > single package. > > Not sure when. But the policies about USE flags were in the devmanual > long before I came here. > > > APACHE2_MODULES, NGINX_MODULES_HTTP, COLLECTD_PLUGINS, QEMU_*, etc. > > Easily half of the things in USE_EXPAND are for only a single > > package. > > Past screwups don't justify future screwups.
I don't see it as a screwup personally. It is often useful to have different namespaces for the few general flags that control a package's general features and the >9000 flags that enable/disable >9000 highly specific plugins. And if violation of the rules is useful, perhaps the rules are wrong?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
