| 1 |
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 02:40:49PM -0400, Matt Turner wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On 04/29/2011 09:26 PM, Mark Loeser wrote: |
| 4 |
> >> "Samuli Suominen (ssuominen)" <ssuominen@g.o> said: |
| 5 |
> >>> ssuominen 11/04/29 18:13:31 |
| 6 |
> >>> |
| 7 |
> >>> Removed: transmission-2.12.ebuild |
| 8 |
> >>> Log: |
| 9 |
> >>> drop old, broken with stable libnotify |
| 10 |
> >>> |
| 11 |
> >>> (Portage version: 2.2.0_alpha30/cvs/Linux x86_64, RepoMan options: --force) |
| 12 |
> >> |
| 13 |
> >> When removing an ebuild, please do document it in the ChangeLog. |
| 14 |
> >> |
| 15 |
> >> Thanks, |
| 16 |
> >> |
| 17 |
> > |
| 18 |
> > no thanks |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Posts like these just make me want to unsubscribe. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Is there actually some debate as to whether ebuild removals should be |
| 23 |
> documented in the ChangeLog? Why shouldn't this be done? It hardly |
| 24 |
> takes any time at all. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Not that I know of. AFAIK, all changes made to ebuilds are supposed to |
| 27 |
be documented in the ChangeLog. That includes version bumps, removals, |
| 28 |
stabilizations, everything. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
No, there is no good reason not to do this. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
William |
Archives