From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 13 03:37:19 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5859D890; Tue, 13 May 2014 03:37:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from argent.heraldsnet.net (argent.heraldsnet.net [69.60.117.17]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3330524F4; Tue, 13 May 2014 03:37:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.scadian.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by argent.heraldsnet.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3FD85C0B; Mon, 12 May 2014 23:30:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 98.218.173.235 (SquirrelMail authenticated user blaise) by mail.scadian.net with HTTP; Mon, 12 May 2014 23:30:36 -0400 Message-ID: <2bad85dedac7519026d326262f15108b.squirrel@mail.scadian.net> In-Reply-To: <536E46E0.7030906@FreeBSD.org> References: <536E46E0.7030906@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 23:30:36 -0400 Subject: Re: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st. From: "Jim Trigg" To: portmgr-feedback@FreeBSD.org User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.23 [SVN] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 03:37:19 -0000 On Sat, May 10, 2014 11:33 am, Bryan Drewery wrote: > You are receiving this mail as it affects FreeBSD ports that you maintain. > > This decision was not easy, but if a port is not being staged after > almost a year, we wonder if the ports are actually maintained and > updated for releases and security issues. In my case, I missed the call to convert *all ports* to staging, as my pants have been bankrupt for about a year (working on restarting the upstream of the port I'm maintainer for). This may have been exacerbated by an interaction of greylisting and duplicate elimination that I just realized occurs - messages get past greylisting faster through the list than direct, so for messages that are sent both to the list and directly to me the copy that gets put in the list folder gets kept instead of the one that would go into my inbox. I will have a very hard time finishing converting to staging in three months - A. I have a day job. B. This port's current configuration (inherited from the previous maintainer) is sufficiently kludgy that I will probably have to rewrite it from scratch. (I've been trying over the weekend to hack it into shape but am realizing that I have to give up and rewrite the whole mess.) Jim Trigg Maintainer, mail/ecartis