On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 17:54:48 -0400 "Anthony G. Basile" <bluen...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> The hardened project has two herds: hardened and hardened-kernel, the > former for toolchain related stuff and the latter for the kernel. We > really need to keep that distinction. So mapping herds to projects > doesn't work. But, mapping hardened/hardened-kernel to our > *subprojects* structure does. Perhaps that might be a more natural > solution in general, not just for hardened. > > We might proceed by associating each herd to a project, and then > letting them decide whether to absorb the herd(s) into their project > level, or break it down to subprojects. So as another example, ppc > and ppc64 teams are merging into one team (powerpc) with one lead > (currently jmorgan). There also we want to keep two herds for the > two different arches for keywording/stabilizing requests. If we just > say "ppc and ppc64 herds belong to powerpc team", then it will be > easy to change "herd" to "subproject" requiring nothing more than > just a webpage put up if it doesn't already exist. Yes, if you do create a one-on-one mapping then it becomes possible. The question becomes "does every herd want to become a (sub)project?". Ideally, they should! Theoretically, there is no problem. Practically, for some herds it'll involve extra work setting up the project related stuff and so on when there is no need for it. Example: If I were to create a MATE herd, that doesn't mean I want a MATE project; documentation wise, the Gentoo Wiki article suffices.
