On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 11:47 AM, George Shapovalov <geo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > Besides, in my opinion, the ability to see "what's there" in at least > minimally categorized way without having to resort to using some special > tools or going to some website is worht something. In this vain I was > proposing going the opposite direction - to allow arbitrary nesting of > categories, like going sci-math -> sci/math and deeper (then packages would > naturally be specified by "FQEN" - fully qualified ebuild names). Its not > like tree walker would be the most complex part of code in portage..
Actually we'd want both tags and nesting. They don't address the same issue. Arbitrary nesting of categories allows better management and storing of ebuilds. It could also allow a meta-ebuild to depend on a whole subcategory to ease maintenance of said meta-ebuild. It's more a developer's feature. Tags allow ebuilds to appear as being pertinent to more (sub-)categories than just the one they're stored into. It may help some of us locate packages they need in a better and/or faster way. It's more of a user's feature. Denis.
