On Sun, 2003-12-07 at 16:08, Tom Wesley wrote: > I think that there is a high degree of probability that > portage-ng(-ng(-ng)) ;) will include some form of tree selection. I > personally would like to see something like this. Either pointing to a > completely different rsync server set, or having a extended set of > architecture definitions. I prefer the latter, as in x86-server, > ~x86-server, x86-desktop, x86-testing and the like. Security updates > would of course need to penetrate all types here. Maybe ~x86 and x86 > simply isn't enough of a split between what is stable and what isn't > anymore, especially because enterprise server people are looking at > Gentoo. > > Just my 2p...
Tom -- I think that this is a good approach. It would surely work for me. Have you been following portage-ng-ng-ng? Is this idea being consider? Have you sent this to the portage-dev list? Would you.... -rdg -- It is vital to remember that information is not knowledge; that knowledge is not wisdom; and that wisdom is not foresight. - Arthur C Clarke -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
