Mike Gilbert <flop...@gentoo.org> writes: > This looks a lot safer than yesterday's patch since there are no > ebuild removals here.
Thank you Mike. > If/when you do want to remove old ebuilds, I suggest creating a github > PR, and let the CI bot check reverse dependencies. Yeah, that would have been a much safer way to remove ebuilds. > This was actually done for the change that was reverted yesterday, but > it seems like the CI results were ignored and the commit was pushed > regardless. Yesterday the original pull requests by Mo did not remove ebuilds. It was only when I started to adopt the PR that I saw > RepoMan scours the neighborhood... > repo.eapi-deprecated 1 > virtual/cblas/cblas-1.0.ebuild: 5 after which I impulsively killed it. I should take this lesson and be more careful removing ebuilds. Yours, Benda
