no emacs/X binary packages considered bad, and worse than emacs with svg

[Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>]

Right now building e.g emacs26 fails on pkgbuild because of librsvg
because of rust because of (not enough randomness AND rust is piggy
about randomness).  While that should be fixed, it's been almost two
months, and as far as I know it isn't.

Not having emacsNN binary packages is unfriendly to users (I know an
actual user who wanted to install emacs26 and failed to find it,
wondering why emacs21 was the newest on NetBSD).  I do not know of
significant use of svg within x11-flavored emacs.  Arguably most use is
just text and menus, and then some jpg/tiff in mail.  Perhaps there is
web browsing involving it.

So, I propose to disable the svg option by default in all the emacs
packages, on the grounds that:

  a missing emacs binary package is really really defective

  emacs binary packages without svg are not that defective

  anybody not using the binary repo is building themselves and can add
  it back if they care

  I suspect the user of the svg option is essentially zero

For this discussion, please assume fixing librsvg/rust is intractable
for pkgbuild.

So, if you object to disabling the svg option by default, please speak
up with rationale including precisely what you think should should
happen instead and why this is overall better for pkgsrc users.

If you actually use svg in emacs, please tell us what for and your
opinion about how many others are likely to do that.

I'll wait 72h before disabling options.


Note that this whole discussion can be terminated if someone actually
fixes librsvg building on pkgbuild.  That still leaves a "things that
use rust are too piggy to use by default unless really necessary"
discussion, but I think that's probably more controversial and less of a
big deal than this "things that don't build on pkgbuild and aren't
really necessary are bad to have on by default" discussion.

Thanks,
Greg