On Wed, 2009-03-25 at 00:30 -0500, Jeremy Olexa wrote:

> So, since we are already in a hugely reactive mode..why don't we just 
> get rid of prefix keywords completely?

Having the unstable keyword in an ebuild indicates that this package
should work on that platform - or more exactly, a previous version was
likely to at least compile there.

When there are no keywords, prefix-users won't see if they would need to
do a *new* port (or at least a test) for their platform or just to *fix*
an existing port. IMO the difference is that if one does not really need
a package, trying to *fix* might be a lower just-for-fun-barrier than to
do it *new*.

>  It gets hairy if the arch most 
> always needs patches (FreeMiNT/IRIX comes to mind). However, this is one 
> reason that we ask for everyone's help in submitting patches upstream.

Dropping all keywords wont change anything here...

> Before anyone says "but, that will be much more likely to break my 
> prefix" - I refute that because we are already running on this policy 
> with regards to the automatic bumps. For the most part, it is smooth. 
> Major packages are masked if someone hasn't tested them yet (eg. gcc & bash)

Agreed, but I like my keywords ;)

/haubi/
-- 
Michael Haubenwallner
Gentoo on a different level