Re: print-PLIST and options

[nia <nia%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 05:42:58PM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> Aleksey Cheusov <a.cheusov%yandex.ru@localhost> writes:
> 
> > On May 6, 2024 7:31:16 PM UTC, Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost> wrote:
> >
> >>so I am for now against.
> >
> > Last patch I provided enables updated print-PLIST if nls option is *already* available. So, it doesn't push any one to do extra work.
> 
> Ah, I did not follow that.   Then it seems ok.
> 
> However, I still think we should discuss "should we add an nls option to
> everything" rather than it just happening.   The nature of changes is
> that if 9/10 think it shouldn't happen and don't do it, and 1/10 think
> it should, it ends up happening, and I don't think our project should
> work that way.   I have no idea who thinks what in this case, but that's
> what raising large scale changes for discussion  is all about.  If it
> happened (I've been distracted lately), sorry for missing it.
> 

I am in favour of adding nls options when the nls support brings in
ICU or some other heavy C++ dependency with an unstable ABI (see
chat/znc/options.mk) that platforms may have trouble building.

Otherwise it's just installing extra files that can be stripped out
in post on an embedded system.