On Thursday, August 25, 2016 07:29:35 PM Raymond Jennings wrote: > I still use bopm, and it built fine last time I emerged it. > > If hopm isn't in the tree yet, why was bopm still pmasked for removal? > > Reason for asking is I'm curious about removal procedures. I was under the > impression that replacement packages get added to the tree before their > obsolete predecessors get pmasked for booting out. > > And if that's not the case, should it be?
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=473754 has a bug noting why bopm is being removed. It was mentioned in there that hopm isn't in tree, sure. It's also mentioned that bopm's default configuration doesn't really do anything, as it depends on a service that was shuttered back in 2013. (If I read the bug report correctly.) However, note that in that bug, bopm is listed has not having a maintainer in Gentoo...no dev (or volunteer) is maintaining it. Without a maintainer, there's nobody with access who's motivated to add hopm. If you'd like to see hopm in the tree, you care more about it than any of the current devs. Which means you should probably look at https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Proxy_Maintainers and see about becoming a proxy maintainer for it. -- :wq
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
