On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 02:40:49PM -0400, Matt Turner wrote: > On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Samuli Suominen <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 04/29/2011 09:26 PM, Mark Loeser wrote: > >> "Samuli Suominen (ssuominen)" <[email protected]> said: > >>> ssuominen 11/04/29 18:13:31 > >>> > >>> Removed: transmission-2.12.ebuild > >>> Log: > >>> drop old, broken with stable libnotify > >>> > >>> (Portage version: 2.2.0_alpha30/cvs/Linux x86_64, RepoMan options: > >>> --force) > >> > >> When removing an ebuild, please do document it in the ChangeLog. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > > > > no thanks > > Posts like these just make me want to unsubscribe. > > Is there actually some debate as to whether ebuild removals should be > documented in the ChangeLog? Why shouldn't this be done? It hardly > takes any time at all.
Not that I know of. AFAIK, all changes made to ebuilds are supposed to be documented in the ChangeLog. That includes version bumps, removals, stabilizations, everything. No, there is no good reason not to do this. William
pgpTW9BtX5OSb.pgp
Description: PGP signature
