Re: Re: Interest inquery: kde4-nosemantic overlay

Fabiano Engler <[email protected]> Fri, 26 Jul 2013 22:36:08 -0300
Newsgroups gmane.linux.gentoo.desktop
Message-ID <CAFP6XkS333KMhE3nQx9vwzh2HQJO_xo-oDaWbdwX6dvLhCp2YA@mail.gmail.com>
Oh man, knowing the next release will force enable semantic desktop is bad
news, I would surely drop KDE desktop when that became stable and I am
forced to update.

Your work offers some hope though, I think the better approach for end
users would be a plug and play overlay, but if I haven't read it here I
would probably not even think about looking for an overlay for this and
would just move away, which I suspect some other users will do too..

Thanks for the time and effort into sharing this, much appreciated.

Fabiano.
On Jul 11, 2013 5:05 AM, "Martin Vaeth" <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Duncan <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Given
> > that the only user response so far is (effectively) that I'm making a
> > mountain out of a molehill...
>
> I just post to let you know that you are not alone  :)
>
> You also have friends in the forum sharing your opinion
> https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-963504-highlight-.html
>
> Your effort is really appreciated.
> However, I guess that most people are like me and just gave up:
> If it really means to make new upstream patches and actually
> fight against upstream policy, it is not worth the hassle.
> The change of the Gentoo policy caused me to remove KDE,
> and I guess most users who do not want the dependencies
> have done (or will do) the same.
>
> Independently on the overlay, I think your framework is
> very interesting: Does your framework manage the ebuilds
> in some overlay, or is it actually running tranparently
> during emerge (probably with a patched version of portage),
> allowing e.g. to change metadata without maintaining the
> ebuild in a separate local overlay?
> (I guess that it is the former, but your choice of the path
> /etc/portage/... suggests the latter)
>
>
>