In my opinion, which is not worth much. If there was anyway that we could make sabayon more accessible to gento and vise versa, I am all for it as a great idea. The gentoo community is what has made sabayon possible in the first place. Sabayon did have no help in the beginning from gentoo. Since those times, sabayon and gentoo is growing what I feel is a good relationship with each other.
I do not know how much time and effort it would take on sabayon devs, they are under paid and over worked as it is. If this effort from sabayon would further improve the growing relationship with gentoo, I think it would be time well spent. We all know gentoo is awesome, so is sabayon ... anytime we can work together, I think it is an improvement that will only better both sides. Just my opinion with out knowing all the facts. On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 10:42 PM, Mitch Harder < [email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 2:49 AM, Joost Ruis <[email protected]> wrote: > > Fabio explained the idea to me some weeks ago, but let me again confirm I > agree. > > > > (o: > > > > 2011/9/19 Sławomir Nizio <[email protected]>: > >> Speaking about git history, don't know why I didn't think of it the > first place: > >> it could be done this way (idea): > >> cp -r overlay overlay-gen > >> mv overlay overlay-sab > >> rm overlay-gen/sab-stuff > >> rm overlay-sab/gen-stuff > >> ZzZ. > >> > >>> This idea seems to be profitable for Gentoo users. I've sometime > >>> thought about it. > >>> > >>> Should it be done or not, let me share my thoughts of main > >>> disadvantages for Sabayon I can think of, for fruitful discussion. > >>> > >>> - A git repository created from scratch wouldn't have ebuilds etc. > >>> history (logs). But if for example the "Gentooish" overlay is made of > >>> current sabayon overlay from which Sabayon stuff is removed, git > >>> history of deleted files would be still available in it. > >>> I don't know if that could be made better, but if not, maybe this > >>> problem could be ignored (of course if answer for this proposal is > >>> "yes"). > >>> I can only think of spliting the overlay *not* into two physical git > >>> repositories, but into two branches. Question here: would it be a > >>> comfortable solution for the maintainers - hmm, it could work. But I'm > >>> not that sure layman-and-others support it. > >>> > >>> - It's possible some eclasses and/or virtuals would need to be shared > >>> and maintained simultaneously in the two overlays, but it's IMO no big > >>> thing. > >>> > >>> I don't know how it looks from the perspective of the infrastructure, > >>> so I won't say anything in this regard. > >>> > >>> On the other hand: what good could it bring to Sabayon - more fame. :) > >>> > > I generally support this proposal. > > But please understand this has the potential to involve a significant > amount of manual labor, so it may take a while to make it happen. > Then again, it may end up being easier. > > >
