| 1 |
On 01/27/16 14:59, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
| 2 |
> -# @FUNCTION: latex-package_has_tetex3 -# @RETURN: true if at |
| 3 |
> least one of (>=tetex-3 or >=ptex-3.1.8 or >=texlive-core-2007) is |
| 4 |
> installed, else false -# @DESCRIPTION: -# It is often used to know |
| 5 |
> if the current TeX installation supports gentoo's -# texmf-update |
| 6 |
> or if the package has to do it the old way |
| 7 |
> -latex-package_has_tetex_3() { - if has_version |
| 8 |
> '>=app-text/tetex-3' || has_version '>=app-text/ptex-3.1.8' || |
| 9 |
> has_version '>=app-text/texlive-core-2007' ; then - true - else - |
| 10 |
> false - fi -} +case ${EAPI:-0} in + 0|1|2|3|4|5) + # Kept for |
| 11 |
> backwards compatibility + latex-package_has_tetex_3() { true; } + |
| 12 |
> ;; +esac |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
Why remove the preexisting comment marked up for documentation |
| 15 |
generation which indicated what it did and why, and stub it out with a |
| 16 |
generically uninformative comment instead of just adding a deprecation |
| 17 |
notice and literally one line of text to indicate why it was |
| 18 |
deprecated and stubbed out? I am not taking issue with the change to |
| 19 |
the code itself, just the removal of documentation in it. |
Archives