That's a neat idea.  While I personally don't have a use-case for
it at the moment, I've worked on projects with large monolithic
repos (comprised of >20 packages) and having the ability to build
the packages individually and as a whole would've been nice.

  -amin

I haven't yet used trackers yet, but I think having a similar
feature would be nice.

How about generalizing the concept as "groups" site-wide?  The
group type would be a separate entity, which may or may not be
nested.  A group then could be a collection of trackers, repos (à
la GitHub/GitLab organizations), lists, wikis, or builds.  One
could then further develop the concept to allow groups to have
admin vs. regular members with different access levels.  Of
course, that may be over the top, but I think having at least a
simple notion of groups to begin with could be useful.

@SirCmpwn what's your take on this?  Being the maintainer of a
few decent-sized projects, do you think this would be handy when

I haven't yet used trackers yet, but I think having a similar
feature would be nice.

How about generalizing the concept as "groups" site-wide?  The
group type would be a separate entity, which may or may not be
nested.  A group then could be a collection of trackers, repos (à
la GitHub/GitLab organizations), lists, wikis, or builds.  One
could then further develop the concept to allow groups to have
admin vs. regular members with different access levels.  Of
course, that may be over the top, but I think having at least a
simple notion of groups to begin with could be useful.

@SirCmpwn what's your take on this?  Being the maintainer of a
few decent-sized projects, do you think this would be handy when