>> I know it’s not actually imperative to add it but actually strongly
>> suggested to maintain things consistent. What do you think about
>> that? Is something You find important to stick?
>>
>
> The problem is that the name is redundant for Gentoo developers. It's
> often helpful to have it
On Mon, 2022-12-19 at 22:05 +0100, mscard...@icloud.com wrote:
>
> I know it’s not actually imperative to add it but actually strongly
> suggested to maintain things consistent. What do you think about
> that? Is something You find important to stick?
>
The problem is that the name is redundant
Hi everyone!
Today I’ve made a simple try to see how many packages miss the
pattern inside metadata.xml and the result was rather unexpected. Without
counting the category/metadata.xml and maintainer-needed there are 1060
metadata.xml that does not contain it.
You can easily verify that using
# Michał Górny (2022-12-19)
# Unmaintained. The current sawfish version in ::gentoo is a prerelease
# from 2017, there was a single release in 2021. Bugs are accumulating.
# Includes dependencies specific to Sawfish.
# Removal on 2023-01-18. Bug #637978.
dev-libs/librep
x11-libs/rep-gtk
# Andreas Sturmlechner (2022-12-18)
# Bundled by >=dev-util/hip-5, removal on 2023-01-19
dev-libs/rocclr
# Andreas Sturmlechner (2022-12-18)
# Stuck at 2.7.0, no revdeps; removal on 2023-01-19
dev-libs/rocm-hostcall
See also:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/650804#c94
