--- xml/htdocs/proj/en/glep/glep-0058.txt	2008/10/28 07:45:27	1.4
+++ xml/htdocs/proj/en/glep/glep-0058.txt	2010/01/13 00:57:49	1.5
@@ -1,15 +1,15 @@
 GLEP: 58
 Title: Security of distribution of Gentoo software - Infrastructure to User distribution - MetaManifest
-Version: $Revision: 1.4 $
-Last-Modified: $Date: 2008/10/28 07:45:27 $
+Version: $Revision: 1.5 $
+Last-Modified: $Date: 2010/01/13 00:57:49 $
 Author: Robin Hugh Johnson <robbat2@gentoo.org>, 
 Status: Draft
 Type: Standards Track
 Content-Type: text/x-rst
 Requires: 44, 60
 Created: October 2006
-Updated: November 2007, June 2008, July 2008, October 2008
-Post-History:
+Updated: November 2007, June 2008, July 2008, October 2008, January 2010
+Post-History: Decemeber 2009
 
 ========
 Abstract
@@ -126,10 +126,10 @@
 the Manifest rules above still provide indirect verification for all
 files after the GLEP33 restructuring if it comes to pass.
 
-If other Manifests are added (such as per-category, or protecting
-versioned eclases), the size of the MetaManifest will be greatly
-reduced, and this specification was written with such a possible future
-addition in mind.
+If other Manifests are added (such as per-category, per first-level
+directory, or protecting versioned eclases), the size of the
+MetaManifest will be greatly reduced, and this specification was written
+with such a possible future addition in mind.
 
 MetaManifest generation will take place as part of the existing process
 by infrastructure that takes the contents of CVS and prepares it for
@@ -246,12 +246,12 @@
 --------------------------------
 With only two levels of Manifests (per-package and top-level), every
 rsync will cause a lot of traffic transfering the modified top-level
-MetaManifest. To reduce this, per-category Manifests are strongly
-recommended. Alternatively, if the distribution method efficently
-handles small patch-like changes in an existing file, using an
-uncompressed MetaManifest may be acceptable (this would primarily be
-distributed version control systems). Other suggestions in reducing this
-traffic are welcomed.
+MetaManifest. To reduce this, first-level directory Manifests are
+strongly recommended. Alternatively, if the distribution method
+efficently handles small patch-like changes in an existing file,
+using an uncompressed MetaManifest may be acceptable (this would
+primarily be distributed version control systems). Other suggestions
+in reducing this traffic are welcomed.
 
 =======================
 Backwards Compatibility