tberman was discussing this sort of change some time ago.  Might be helpful if 
he could let us know the status of this ;-)

Stu
--
On Monday 06 October 2003 10:47 pm, Ian Leitch wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm sure this HAS to have been discussed before, and if it has, it was
> before my time. I'd like to hear peoples opinions and what the
> conclusion was from earlier discussions.
>
> Just to make everything clear, I will outline exactly what I have in
> mind.
>
> In my view, the portage tree would benefit from having the following:
>
> STABLE arch:
> Obvious realy, stable packages only. Considered a stable ebuild and
> stable software.
>
> PRESTABLE (perhaps called Testing?) ~arch:
> Only software considered stable but whos ebuild is considered unstable
> or just badly written. OpenOffice is a good example: 1.1 is a stable
> release but the ebuild contains warnings about the ebuild itself being
> alpha.
>
> UNSTABLE >arch (or some other symbol):
> Software stability takes precedence over ebuild stability here, eg a
> package whos ebuild was very small and perfectly writen but the software
> itself was considered unstable would be marked unstable and not
> prestable.
>
>
> Regards,
> Ian.
>
>
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

-- 
Stuart Herbert                                              stuart@gentoo.org
Gentoo Developer                                       http://www.gentoo.org/
Beta packages for download            http://dev.gentoo.org/~stuart/packages/
Come and meet me in March 2004                 http://www.phparch.com/cruise/

GnuGP key id# F9AFC57C available from http://pgp.mit.edu
Key fingerprint = 31FB 50D4 1F88 E227 F319  C549 0C2F 80BA F9AF C57C
--