Re: disabling GTK+ features to shrink GTK+

[Tshepang Lekhonkhobe <tshepang gmail com>]

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 13:35, Matthias Clasen
<matthias clasen gmail com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 6:10 AM, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe
> <tshepang gmail com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Yeah, I get it, but here's the point: it isn't nice when a maintainer
>> says "unlikely" without giving even one reason, leaving the rest of us
>> to guess (EG, "that's most likely the reason").
>
> These things have been discussed before, more than once.

In such a case I think it's better to provide a pointer/link. I think
you should not assume the readers are aware of such discussions.

> If we add a configure flag to turn feature A off, we're making a
> statement that essentially says: we support configurations with and
> without A. Now add a second flag to turn off feature B off, and say we
> support configurations with A+B, A+!B, !A+B, !A+!B, and so on... and
> once we've added these flags you will come back and complain whenever
> your favourite of the 2^n supported configurations break. Also think
> about bug reports. Instead of version x.y.z being a good indication
> what code is running, there are now 2^n variants of version x.y.z,
> each with possibly different bugs.

Thanks for this explanation. Oh, and I truly honour your contributions to FLOSS.


-- 
blog: http://tshepang.tumblr.com