From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FxlyK-0001Ar-O4 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 14:33:53 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k64EVNkS012035; Tue, 4 Jul 2006 14:31:23 GMT Received: from skinny.southernlinux.net (ns2.rednecks.net [64.192.52.5]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k64ERgbC019918 for ; Tue, 4 Jul 2006 14:27:43 GMT Received: (qmail 12085 invoked by uid 210); 4 Jul 2006 10:26:27 -0400 Received: from 64.192.55.166 by skinny (envelope-from , uid 201) with qmail-scanner-1.25st (clamdscan: 0.88.2/1582. f-prot: 4.4.2/3.14.11. spamassassin: 3.1.0. perlscan: 1.25st. Clear:RC:1(64.192.55.166):. Processed in 0.063373 secs); 04 Jul 2006 14:26:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.99.99.11?) (64.192.55.166) by 0 with SMTP; 4 Jul 2006 10:26:27 -0400 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Virtualization Herd From: Ned Ludd To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <1152021552.29593.43.camel@continental.nick125.com> References: <1151948992.29593.23.camel@continental.nick125.com> <200607032148.11731.hollow@gentoo.org> <1151956582.29593.25.camel@continental.nick125.com> <200607032228.37612.hollow@gentoo.org> <623652d50607040411s4a7e5513pd4e37ac4b175abc0@mail.gmail.com> <1152021552.29593.43.camel@continental.nick125.com> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Gentoo Linux Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2006 10:27:36 -0400 Message-Id: <1152023256.26874.5.camel@localhost> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.2.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 245edea5-8408-4be0-b67b-8165e840d0f1 X-Archives-Hash: 215333abb1cf00669490751f8b6ae0ce On Tue, 2006-07-04 at 07:59 -0600, Nick Devito wrote: > Yeah, to me, having those in the emulation category just > doesn't...."fit" there, but, that's just me. Maybe we could take xen, > vmware, qemu, and related packages out of app-emulation, and make a new > category, app-virtualization. That would seem to fit a bit better then > emulation. Everything looks perfectly fine the way it is right now. Changing stuff for the sake of changing stuff does nothing but cause other people problems. Forcing a package moves which incramentally makes doing package updates take longer and longer over time. It also forces people to run fixpackages more than they really should ever have to. Sometimes even causing a full remerge of the package. Please just be happy that the packages all exist and are being well maintained after. -- Ned Ludd Gentoo Linux -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list