Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Monday 28 January 2008, Ryan Hill wrote:In your package.mask entry, it would help to have the following info:it would help too if you add a comment like this to the top of the mask file -mike
I've did it instead: Index: package.mask =================================================================== RCS file: /var/cvsroot/gentoo-x86/profiles/package.mask,v retrieving revision 1.8234 diff -u -B -r1.8234 package.mask --- package.mask 3 Feb 2008 10:28:21 -0000 1.8234 +++ package.mask 3 Feb 2008 13:06:48 -0000 @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ # When you add an entry to this file, add your name, the date, and an # explanation of why something is getting masked # -# NOTE: Please add your entry at the top! +# NOTE: Please add your entry at the top (below the examples)! # ## @@ -21,6 +21,25 @@ ## End example ## +## Best last rites (removal) practices, as suggested by +## Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> +## +## Include the following info: +## a) reason for masking +## b) bug # for the removal (and yes you should have one) +## c) date of removal (either the date or "in x days") +## d) the word "removal" +## +## Example +## +# Dev Elepor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (25 Jan 2012) +# Masked for removal in 30 days. Doesn't work +# with new libfoo. Upstream dead, gtk-1, smells +# funny. (bug #987654) +#app-misc/some-package +## +## End example, put the real deal below. + # Benedikt Böhm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (03 Feb 2008) # Masked for removal in 30 days wrt #208584 # Does not use webapp/depend.apache eclass correctly
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
