> On Wed, 10 Aug 2016, NP-Hardass wrote:
> 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
On 11 August 2016 at 04:22, NP-Hardass wrote:
> 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
On Wed, 10 Aug 2016 16:22:24 -0400
NP-Hardass wrote:
> 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 ol
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 rebuildin
On 06/23/2016 02:04 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 rebuildin
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 immediate
