I'm with Ned & fozer on this, in general at least. This is the second time this issue has come up over the last month or so; it's what kicks off the flat-tree debate. My preference in practice is to leave the current tree allocation of packages to categories well alone (to avoid unnecessary disruption), de-emphasize the tree categories as useful data (I find them more of a hindrance than a help) and focus on query tools and metadata.xml.
It'd be nice to ditch categories completely of course, but obviously that's not practical :) A suggestion, if I may. One simple way to manage a set of packages spread across the tree is to create set of softlinks to them in a directory outside the tree. So you could create a directory "pam" somewhere handy, and softlink from the relevant packages in your CVS tree or sync tree to it. Kev. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
