On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Anthony G. Basile <bluen...@gentoo.org> wrote: > I would not say "caution" so much as good judgment. The first example that > came to mind was working with the profiles which crosses many directories > and files. In the past when I did restructuring to the hardened profiles, I > tested by using a branch of the hardened-dev overlay. It was annoying and I > would do a bind mount over /usr/portage/profiles and had to rebase manually. > A test branch of the the main tree which could get rebased and eventually > merged back would make the workflow so much better. Another example was > when we revitalized the selinux policies. There were hundreds of commits to > be done. A branch here that got merged back would be ideal. >
Agree. You could still do this with an outside repository that everybody adds a remote to (a git repository can have many remotes). You can merge/rebase from a branch outside of gentoo to one inside of gentoo. I think the preference should be that users doing their own work should try to keep the interim stuff out of the main gentoo repository. On the other hand, when collaborating teams should be welcome to use the gentoo repository or their own overlay as makes sense, with the preference moving more to gentoo as the number of impacted devs/testers/etc gets bigger. It will always be a judgment call. In the end there isn't that big a difference in git between "git checkout origin/proj/kde5" and "git checkout kde5overlay/master." That is the beauty of git. -- Rich
