[Slackbuilds-users] template idea: --no-same-owner

[Duncan Roe]

Hi Urchlay,

On Sun, Aug 16, 2026 at 05:31:36AM -0400, B. Watson wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 16 Aug 2026, Lumin Etherlight via SlackBuilds-users wrote:
>
> > "B. Watson" <urchlay at slackware.uk> writes:
> >
> > > Also note  that your  commits have  to be  one per
> > > build, not  one giant commit that  alters multiple
> > > builds.  I know  it's annoying  but that's  how we
> > > keep track of things...
> >
> >        Just to note, this  will mean /thousands/ of
> >  git commits just removing unused variables.

2777 commits of which I have so far pushed 2.
>
> Yeah. It's actually why it hasn't already been done. The extra
> unused variables don't actually do any harm...

They blow out the output from sbolint -a to over 5000 lines (nice new log
feature BTW). With this bulk change it gets down below 1000. You can start to
see other candidate patterns e.g.:-
| suggest replacing 'python' with 'python2' for future-proofing
My thinking was that fixing these now would make the admins' job easier at the
next stable.
>
> The best time to do this would be during 'development cycle',
> when a new Slackware stable has just been released, and the repo
> is closed while we port all the builds over (fix compile errors,
> remove builds that were included in the new Slackware, etc).

I thouhght PRs were blocked during the freeze. Are they not?
>
> Unfortunately that means, no time soon. We all have our guesses of
> when we expect a new Slackware, but nobody knows...

I had the idea that I would script the PR process using githup-cli to make the
PR. That's nearly done. Then I would put it in a cron job to send a constant
trickle until they were all done. The constant trickle is to ensure servers
don't get swamped. Also gives time to delete branches when PRs are closed.

What would you like me to do?

Cheers ... Duncan.