On 04/09/10 08:10, Nirbheek Chauhan 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?
Use common sense: if it's work in progress then committing a broken ebuild which is p.masked is IMHO acceptable (especially if you need to bump/add more ebuilds to get this one working). At the same time if you don't plan on improving it and just want to get it committed somewhere - use overlay. -- Krzysztof Pawlik <nelchael at gentoo.org> key id: 0xF6A80E46 desktop-misc, java, apache, ppc, vim, kernel, python...
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
