On Fri, 2025-03-28 at 17:51 +0100, Ulrich Müller wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, 28 Mar 2025, Michał Górny wrote: > > > > One idea could be to merge these into a single status attribute, and > > > maybe salvage the "core" value. That is: > > > > > > - core: Only the Gentoo repository (for the time being) > > > - official: Repositories maintained by a project or a developer > > > (maybe opt-in or opt-out, i.e. allow devs to have unofficial > > > repositories?) > > > - unofficial: everything else > > > WFM. Not sure we can remove the "quality" attribute without breaking > > stuff, but we can at least clean "status" a bit. > > Yeah, that may be an obstacle. If we must keep the quality attribute, > then how about using quality="core" for the Gentoo repo, and > quality="experimental" for everything else? Very few repos use the > values "stable" or "testing", and we don't seem to have any criteria > for them.
If I were to quickly guess some criteria, then I'd guess "stable" would mean we have consistent stable keywords, "testing" would mean same for ~arch, and "experimental" would mean no consistency expected — i.e. same as profiles. But then, the question would be: do we expect people to actually enforce that somehow, or just declare it? And then, is it really worth the effort? So yeah, perhaps here too we should just revert to the lowest value of "experimental" and raise if people opt-in to a higher level. Except perhaps ::guru, which I'd personally dare say fits "testing". -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
