Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 4 Jan 2021 18:51:20 +0100
From:      Guido Falsi <mad@madpilot.net>
To:        Andrea Venturoli <ml@andreaventuroli.it>, xfce@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: XFCE upgraded to 4.16
Message-ID:  <381c702b-c1a7-ac99-c9bb-82fd08ef3eba@madpilot.net>
In-Reply-To: <6e8ec4ab-0382-7eae-e623-5f48df2f10c7@andreaventuroli.it>
References:  <46a21428-a640-f895-0f3b-f44c09497bf5@madpilot.net> <747ecac6-6d60-6143-1ae1-47801299b59b@netfence.it> <1502a321-02c0-13e9-16b3-6f11da9de3af@madpilot.net> <47ede65d-817a-8d80-a582-660d43ac6ac3@andreaventuroli.it> <ee9f59de-8814-cf6d-cf8a-ff13a88dccd2@madpilot.net> <7f9cc4b4-81aa-354e-4bf5-c4867ca51d13@madpilot.net> <6e8ec4ab-0382-7eae-e623-5f48df2f10c7@andreaventuroli.it>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 04/01/21 18:44, Andrea Venturoli wrote:
> On 1/4/21 6:22 PM, Guido Falsi wrote:
>> On 04/01/21 18:02, Guido Falsi wrote:
>>> On 04/01/21 17:43, Andrea Venturoli wrote:
>>>> P.S.
>>>> Just out of curiosity: why weren't these ports removed, since we all 
>>>> know they were going to stop working?
>>>
>>> Why remove them while they are still working fine?
>>>
>>
>> BTW, some already had a deprecation notice.
> 
> I know.
> 
> What I meant was not to remove them early; I was just curious why they 
> weren't removed at the same time XFCE 4.16 was introduced, since they 
> stopped working on that same day.
> 
> Rationale is: don't waste time trying to build them, since it's useless.

They are marked BROKEN, so not being build anyway. At least in theory 
port rules require a deprecation period for ports before removal, 
including BROKEN ones.

Someone could step in and fix them, for example, this is easier if the 
port is not actually removed.

-- 
Guido Falsi <mad@madpilot.net>



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?381c702b-c1a7-ac99-c9bb-82fd08ef3eba>