From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 8 13:59:00 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 EDFE8B57 for ; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 13:58:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.rcn.com (smtp.rcn.com [69.168.97.78]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE64F1472 for ; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 13:58:59 +0000 (UTC) X_CMAE_Category: , , X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=A4ruztqG c=1 sm=1 a=S1FUpj77oTthe32bFFoYZQ==:17 a=HhNBMwnThMwA:10 a=0EuHnjpoJUEA:10 a=YNqtyO0l_hcA:10 a=LaogzpLLAAAA:8 a=6I5d2MoRAAAA:8 a=f3gzZMlYyJ0NhO48IwEA:9 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=SV7veod9ZcQA:10 a=AHAKnhNc73WjJ6IsrWQA:9 a=_W_S_7VecoQA:10 a=WmAKGbZ1Rjcotocx:21 a=S1FUpj77oTthe32bFFoYZQ==:117 X-CM-Score: 0 X-Scanned-by: Cloudmark Authority Engine X-Authed-Username: YW5hdEByY24uY29t Authentication-Results: smtp02.rcn.cmh.synacor.com header.from=mi+thun@aldan.algebra.com; sender-id=neutral Authentication-Results: smtp02.rcn.cmh.synacor.com smtp.mail=mi+thun@aldan.algebra.com; spf=neutral; sender-id=neutral Authentication-Results: smtp02.rcn.cmh.synacor.com smtp.user=anat; auth=pass (PLAIN) Received-SPF: neutral (smtp02.rcn.cmh.synacor.com: 108.5.56.23 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of aldan.algebra.com) Received: from [108.5.56.23] ([108.5.56.23:10344] helo=[192.168.1.8]) by smtp.rcn.com (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 3.5.1.37854 r(Momo-dev:3.5.1.0)) with ESMTPA id E3/D8-51074-1A004435; Tue, 08 Apr 2014 09:58:58 -0400 Message-ID: <5344005C.4030503@aldan.algebra.com> Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2014 09:57:48 -0400 From: "Mikhail T." User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD ports which are currently scheduled for deletion References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.17 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2014 13:59:00 -0000 On 08.04.2014 08:00, freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org wrote: > If people are using a port, then I would agree it should be kept > regardless of maintainer status. But that doesn't mean keeping > everything forever as long as it compiles. Why not? Why not "keep everything forever as long as it compiles"? Where is this idea coming from, that stuff must be continuously updated to be considered usable? > It's certainly possible that antoine@ has been a little overzealous in > deprecating ports, but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect to have > some evidence that any particular port has actually *worked* in the last > ten or fifteen years. There is no evidence it has NOT worked either. And the burden of proof, that a change is necessary (or even desirable), is on whoever is suggesting the change. The most recent list included not only software for interfacing with old video-cameras -- various modules for xmms, for example, are on the chopping block too, for just another example. Why?.. -mi P.S. Please, CC me on any follow-ups -- I'm only getting digests of freebsd-ports@ making replying difficult.