[gentoo-dev] Re: package.mask-ed ebuilds

[Ryan Hill <dirtyepic@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1195 bytes --]

On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 12:40:50 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan <nirbheek@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Hello!
> 
> So, I can't find any documentation about this; nor can I find a
> best-practices list. Can we add broken ebuilds in-tree as long as they
> are package.masked? automagic deps, wrong deps, missing deps, file
> collisions, etc etc? Even if it makes the ebuild completely unusable
> by itself?
> 
> If yes:
> 
> So we can add completely broken and useless stuff to tree as long as
> it's package.masked?
> 
> If no:
> 
> What's the minimum amount of "working-ness" that an ebuild must have
> to be added to tree? Who decides this? The QA team?

package.mask is good for when you have a bunch of stuff that needs to be
uncaged at the same time or for something potentially hazardous that needs
testing.  i wouldn't add something that is in itself broken.  i don't know if
it's allowed or not but an overlay is just more convenient for work like that.


-- 
fonts,                                            by design, by neglect
gcc-porting,                              for a fact or just for effect
wxwidgets @ gentoo     EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]