Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 12:23:36 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> To: Emanuel Haupt <ehaupt@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/sysutils/screenie Makefile pkg-descr Message-ID: <20100928122336.GB32589@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20100928075649.c3bcb0a9.ehaupt@FreeBSD.org> References: <201009272151.o8RLpA8I002279@repoman.freebsd.org> <20100928024255.GA61304@FreeBSD.org> <20100928075649.c3bcb0a9.ehaupt@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 07:56:49AM +0200, Emanuel Haupt wrote: > Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > > But the port does not look BROKEN, why deprecating it? I mean, it > > can still be useful for some people despite that development ceased. > > It is not BROKEN but as Doug pointed out, I felt that this port has > passed the point of its usefulnes. With currently 4835 unmaintained > ports in our tree I took a bit more aggressive aproach and marked it > for deletion. If until then no one steps in, it will leave a reference > in MOVED and can always be brought back. However, extending the > expiration date to 3 months seems like a good idea, that way automated > reminder mails (are there still mechanisms?) can reach a larger > audience of possible interested people. I am thinking that there might be users who do not really want to become maintainer of otherwise perfectly working port (for them). Hence my point of that we should probably deprecate ports that have some run-time/build problems, not just mere lack of development. ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100928122336.GB32589>