packages.gentoo.org should be moved to repos.gentoo.org If possible use "301 Moved Permanently"
Huh, why? packages.gentoo.org lists packages in the main repository, not repositories
(In reply to Mart Raudsepp from comment #1) > Huh, why? packages.gentoo.org lists packages in the main repository, not > repositories Uhh, sorry. Site to be moved is overlays.gentoo.org
I hope those in favor of this terminology change can explain this to others in gentoo-project or gentoo-dev mailing list or something beforehand such big changes to the URL. I definitely do not agree with this terminology change, and I don't recall such discussions - however I was a bit away a year ago. Maybe there's some threads to simply point at that I can see and agree to. In any case, I'm not website team
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Talk:Overlay#Introduction_is_outdated.2Fobsolete
This bug is embarrassing! What term should we use? * The Gentoo Handbook uses the terms "overlay" and "repository". * The Wiki article is untitled "Ebuild repository" whereas the Gentoo project is named "Overlays". * Some people want to change the denomination and others do not want. References: -> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Talk:Ebuild_repository#Introduction_is_outdated.2Fobsolete -> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Handbook:AMD64/Portage/CustomTree -> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project_Talk:Overlays I think we should choose one of these two terms.
Infra has now setup repos.gentoo.org -- though there's no redirect from overlays.g.o.
(In reply to Josh Saddler from comment #6) > Infra has now setup repos.gentoo.org -- though there's no redirect from > overlays.g.o. Someone should also update the content of the title element which still is <!DOCTYPE html> <html> <head> <title>Gentoo Overlays</title>
I am in favor of using the term Ebuild repository, but I'm definitely open to having others weigh in on this. Ebuild repository describes the item exactly and is up-to-date in today's developer vocabulary. This may sound like a trivial reason to use the term, but I think it is very important to define terms (and goals for projects as well, but that's a different issue entirely!). I am not in favor of using the term "custom tree", "overlay", or "package repository", although I've seen all these terms used before to describe the same item. 1. "Custom tree" is way too generic of a term. "Tree" in computer science is an abstract data type. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_(data_structure) 2. The term 'overlay', although used in the past, doesn't provide very accurate connotations to the reader (especially in the vernacular of 2017). As far as I understand nothing is really "overlaid"; all the ebuilds are contained in separate repositories. The Gentoo ebuild repository is always separate from other ebuild repositories. 3. "Package repository" is simply misleading. Ebuild repositories to not contain packages (and they should never do so). They contain the ebuilds that are needed to install certain packages, but NOT the packages. :)
To reflect upon and revise my position, I am now in favor of using the term "overlay" as the colloquial reference to ebuild repositories. That is, ebuild repositories other than the main ebuild repository (gentoo.git). I have updated the wiki article with this terminology clarification: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Ebuild_repository For non-native English speakers, 'colloquial' means 'informal'. This is perfect our our case for the reasons described above. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colloquialism This would make both terms (overlay and ebuild repository) equally valid, with overlay being the colloquial form and ebuild repository being the technical form. This also means that it is equality valid to keep both (and keep the redirect that was created as well). I'm still not in favor of using the terms "CustomTree" (too generic) or "packages repository" (overlays don't hold packages, they hold ebuilds - scripts that contain instructions for how to customize and compile source code into packages).
