[proaudio] (cvs|svn|git) vs 9999

[carmen <_@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

wondering if theres any concensus on -9999 versions vs seperate -cvs directories? with 9999, with -cvs, it breaks the continuity of one directory per package, and additional checks must be added to avoid conflicts.

as an example, ive installed libgig-cvs. now on a -DNuav world, its trying to install libgig-2.0.2. i had to add libgig-9999 to package.provided (thus the seperate -cvs version didnt prevent me from /etc/portage file editing after all. id rather edit package.keywords once to enable -9999 version than have to continually do -uav to make sure non-cvs versions arent being brought in beacise i didnt populate package.provided.. preemptive handling of the situation.

another example is the patchage-cvs and om-cvs ebuilds that i submitted a while ago. the author has changed to SVN, at a different host. at this point, the -cvs should be changed to -svn to be consistent (but still no consistency to whether a 'unreleased' version is -cvs, -svn, -git, -bzr, -mercurial, or what... confusing users as to which version to try). also it doesnt show up in eg eix or esearch 'available versions'. 

in any case, my vote is for -9999. this is what the main portage tree does as well..

c,c