William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 10:12 +0000, Duncan wrote: >> Isn't the point, however, that if it's a die if the do* is on a file that >> no longer exists, the maintainer will see it when they test, take care of >> it, and as a result, it shouldn't ever hit the user? > > Yes, exactly the idea. > >> If the maintainer sees it, they can either investigate, if the judge it >> worth it, or simply kill the do* in question. > > Yep > >> If the user sees it, it means the maintainer failed to do his job. I >> think that's the suggestion, that it be mandatory for maintainers to >> deal with, and the user shouldn't ever see it. > > Dang your better than most carpenters, hitting the nail on the head > repeatedly :)
Look, it's quite simple. Not everyone shares the same opinion on this. Therefore, if you are the type that thinks that ebuilds should die on a missing doc, then add || die after your dodoc call. If you are the type that thinks this is overkill, then don't add || die after your dodoc call. Pushing to eliminate one of these options is going to make one group or the other very annoyed. -- dirtyepic you'd be tossed up or wash up, the narrator relates gentoo org in a spartan antarctican walk for many days 9B81 6C9F E791 83BB 3AB3 5B2D E625 A073 8379 37E8 (0x837937E8) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
