On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 12:37 PM Benda Xu <hero...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > 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.
Ah, that makes more sense.
