On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 17:58:39 +0100 "Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfri...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > Hi all, > > Right now we have arches maintaining a stable keyword and we have > arches that don't do that. > > This makes me think that the classification of profiles as "exp", > "dev", "stable" in profiles.desc does not really cover all usecases. > > [Current meaning: > "stable" - repoman checks it, arch has stable keyword > "dev" - repoman checks it with -d > "exp" - repoman ignores it] > > I'd like to propose two additional profile types: > "nonstable" - repoman checks it, arch has no stable keyword (and if > there is one in an ebuild, repoman treats it as arch=~arch) > "dev-nonstable" - repoman checks it with -d, arch has no stable > keyword (and if there is one in an ebuild, repoman treats it as > arch=~arch) +1 (dev-nonstable isnt really appealing as history has proved that nobody dares to check deptree for dev/exp profiles) > Why not make it possible to keep an ~arch only deptree consistent?! it is possible, there's just a lot of confusion around it :) this "cosmetic" change should really help in avoiding this confusion Alexis.
