New comment by paper42 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/pull/37985#issuecomment-1179804865

Comment:
> Why not do both #37971 and this? Less cycles more good, right?

There is currently 1 cycle, we need to break it at one point, then we will have 0 cycles. If we break it in 2 points, we will still have 0 cycles, so we won't have "less" cycles. I am not sure what you meant by that.

It's easier to just update one template and automatically get the subpackage updated than update two templates and make sure they are kept in sync.