| 1 |
On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 21:57:04 +0200 |
| 2 |
Davide Pesavento <pesa@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > I would personally go for the following layout: |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > - All packages, |
| 8 |
> > - Core system [includes baselayout], |
| 9 |
> > - Eclasses and Profiles, |
| 10 |
> > - GCC Porting, |
| 11 |
> > - Hardened, |
| 12 |
> > - Keywording & Stabilization, |
| 13 |
> > - New packages ('New ebuilds' previously), |
| 14 |
> > - SELinux. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> [...] |
| 17 |
> > |
| 18 |
> > Your thoughts? |
| 19 |
> > |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> I'd split "eclasses" from "profiles", as they're not normally related |
| 22 |
> to each other. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> We could also have separate components for "keywording" vs |
| 25 |
> "stabilization", which would make the use of STABLEREQ/KEYWORDREQ |
| 26 |
> keywords obsolete at the same time. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Note that there's no sane way to move/split bugs, so we'd either have |
| 29 |
to leave the old (disabled) components and add two new ones, or leave |
| 30 |
all current bugs in one of them and create the other one empty. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Best regards, |
| 34 |
Michał Górny |
| 35 |
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/> |
Archives