On 06/23/2016 05:04 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > I have created tracker bug https://bugs.gentoo.org/586734 for the > LINGUAS to L10N conversion, and started to file bugs for individual > packages. (Starting with lightweight stuff like metapackages, so users > won't spend too much time with rebuilding if they don't get their L10N > configuration immediately right.) > > However, it looks like filing bugs for all affected packages is going > to be tedious. Therefore I am asking for permission to update ebuilds > for the easy cases directly, e.g. when the change is only a simple > renaming from linguas_* to l10n_*. > > Please speak up if you don't want your packages to be touched and > prefer bugs to be filed for them. > > Ulrich >
I was going through my packages to make sure that I was compliant with this change, and found that I was not. The l10n eclass makes use of the LINGUAS USE_EXPAND and isn't covered in the tracker bug. I attempted to read through the old thread to see if someone mentioned that eclass, but I must have missed it if someone mentioned it. Are we EOL'ing that eclass, or keeping it (update or revbump)? Looks to me like we can't edit that eclass in place, so if we are to keep it, we should probably revbump it, update the -r1 to L10N, and add a deprecation warning to the old eclass to help maintainers migrate over. Any opinions? I'd be happy work on the revbump for the eclass if we decide to go that route. CC'ing yngwin since it is his eclass. -- NP-Hardass
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
