On Thursday 13 March 2008, Steve Dibb wrote: > Because package.mask in CVS for profiles is so huge, I think it might > help it to get organized if we split it up a bit. > > halcyon had a good idea for the scheme: testing, broken, removal. That > seems to sum up the main 3 reason that a package would be masked. > > Right now there are 679 entries in package.mask. The reason I came up > with the idea was to find a way to make it easier for treecleaners to > quickly see which ones they were working on. > > I'd like to take the discussion to -dev but wanted to get QA's thoughts > first. I haven't looked into whether or not this is technically > feasible at all.
i think the real solution here is allowing masking in a package -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
