Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 23:13:50 +0400 From: Ruslan Mahmatkhanov <cvs-src@yandex.ru> To: Carsten Jensen <tomse@tomse.dk> Cc: "freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org" <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Removed ports - looking from the bench Message-ID: <4E6BB6EE.4030109@yandex.ru> In-Reply-To: <4E6B1AF5.7090900@tomse.dk> References: <4E6B1AF5.7090900@tomse.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I was thinking of this problem, and i believe compressed file is not the solution, since the ports tree infrastructure changes, and that removed ports should be changed also. The second problem is where to store distfiles? Because the majority (nb: not all of them) of removed ports it's a disappeared projects with only distfile hosted on FreeBSD ftp servers. The first problem maybe solved by public github repo (ports graveyard) with liberal write access permissions (since users use it on their own risk anyway) to allow this ports be in good shape. But three problems still remains: a) how to integrate needed port from graveyard into the working tree? (suggest user to manually copy port subdirectory is ugly) b) what to do with port-management tools that know nothing about this guys (or know via MOVED that they were removed some time ago) c) where to store distfiles I treat manual copying ugly, but not impossible, since i supposed that all portname conflicts (caused by repocopies, renames etc) already will be solved in graveyard repo. Just my 0.02 kopeks. Carsten Jensen wrote on 10.09.2011 12:08: > I've seen many requests of late, for ports that are no longer in active > development, abandoned etc > but still working, but they've been removed from ports. > > here's an idea, I don't know if this has been discussed before. > It requires work of course. But doesn't require a person to know how to > develop, which is the biggest issue for > people who use ports but don't know how to make a fix to keep it active. > > When a port is removed, it'll be compressed and put as a single download > file. > this way the patch information isn't lost and it'll be easier for > someone to build said package. > Of course there'll be complications, this is where a disclaimer comes in > (no support, you are on your own). > > As I see it, the work required, after the initial setup, is when a port > is marked for deletion is to > pack it, upload it, and add a comment as last known working (FBSD) version. > It sounds easier than probable will be > > The package could then be deleted when it survives 2 major FBSD versions. > > I know this will be 2 databases need maintaining, but look at the good > aspects. > * Ports will be cleaned of old/(almost) unused stuff > * People will still have a chance to use an old application > > I could be wrong but I don't think that it requires a lot to maintain, > just a few hours a month. > > Some major things to discuss about this is: > Hosting: will freebsd.org / mirrors lend space/bandwidth to this ? > Initial setup: package should be download-able using fetch, perhaps a > nice web interface with descriptions of the package. > > > By definition of package I mean the files in ports excluding the source > code compressed, so you basically could extract said package into ports > and use it as it never was removed. > > If there's enough backup for this project, I wouldn't mind taking on the > job, but for it to get most the success > it'll need help from the port committers. > > > Cheers > Carsten -- Regards, Ruslan Tinderboxing kills... the drives.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4E6BB6EE.4030109>