On Tuesday 27 October 2009 02:07:02 Ryan Hill wrote: > On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 11:48:39 +0200 Petteri Räty wrote: > > James Cloos wrote: > > > When you first psoted this list I noticed some (or several?) live > > > ebuilds. Git-9999 is the one I remember. > > > > > > Those should not get nuked during global cleanups, as they are likely > > > to be in active use notwithstanding their keywording or masking. > > > > Their maintainers should be active and switch their ebuilds to EAPI 2. > > If they don't have an active maintainer, then do we want to keep live > > ebuilds for them around? > > Your stated goal was to remove unused ebuilds, which live ebuilds are not, > regardless of the status of the maintainer. And I'm pretty sure git has an > active maintainer. :P
indeed. you really should file bugs for these instead of deleting ebuilds on people who missed a thread on gentoo-dev. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
