If noone has any strong reasonable objections, I'd like to add a Paludis profile to the tree. This would use Paludis as the default provider for virtual/portage (which is a less than ideal name, but that is another discussion entirely), and provide ebuild devs with a place where they can try out some of our profile enhancements should they want to. It is worth noting on the last point that most of these are long-standing Portage feature requests, at least some of which are planned for inclusion in Portage at some point in the future. This would allow devs access to them earlier, as a sort of testbed.
The next question is where to put it. The options as I see them are under default-linux/x86/ or in a top-level paludis/ a la hardened, selinux, embedded, and the like. The latter is easier to exclude for those worried about tree size, though the impact there should be minimal. Neither way produces significantly more duplication, since we can make use of multiple profile inheritance. If anyone has any preference or other input, I'd like to hear it. That's my proposal. The benefits I like to think are obvious. The drawbacks are, as far as I can see, in tree size, which should be minimal. Those concerned about local tree size can exclude it, and for size on the mirrors it's trivial compared to the rest of the tree. Comments? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
