On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 13:48:37 +0200 Luis Ressel <ara...@aixah.de> wrote:
> I think I'd rather go with the original workflow. Okay, perhaps > package.masking -9999 is a bit uncommon and clutters package.mask, but > it's not all *that* bad and it eases the workflow. Depends on whose workflow you are referring to; it doesn't affect the maintainer, but the clutter can be a pain if you attempt to keep the p.mask size low. Having package.mask as a directory would be a solution to this; however, there's not much other need for it to be a directory. -- With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : tom...@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
