I don't see this being that different than flattening the repo itself. You'd still have to deal with any deletions, renamings, and additions to the repo (unless you don't care about tracking upstream changes). In that case, it's probably easier to delete and then rerun the find command (either copying/moving files directly or creating symlinks) and just rebuild the flattened repo with updates from upstream. This would be easily scriptable to update a secondary repo by git, delete the existing flattened repo, and then use find to recreate the flattened repo. It'd be nice to use rsync, but I'm not sure if that would support being able to sync between the flattened and categorized repos (I'm not very good with rsync from memory and always have to dig into the man page).

That is exactly what I was thinking. There is no need to do anything upstream. Rsync can just do rsync's thing and efficiently keep your local repo up to date. Generating removing and recreating the symlink directory should take seconds at most and the best part is nobody else has to know or care you are doing it.

I love categorized slackbuilds under category folder.

I don't intention to propose any change to repository. It is just that flattened repository can me more easy to deal with. I rare need information about what category software is - in most cases I know this in advance. As people claim around Slackware is about tinkering - not about that there is only one way to do things. I found this useful - maybe others also will find the same.

It was never my intention to question you doing this. I was simply providing what I found useful as well. I don't think it's ever bad to see multiple options

Sorry it turned into a flatten vs wildcard debate. That wasn't my goal.

sbopkg comes with companion, sqg, which generates queues of dependencies...

Nice.