Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 21:06:57 +1100 From: Kubilay Kocak <koobs@FreeBSD.org> To: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Martin Wilke <miwi.fbsd@gmail.com>, ports-committers@freebsd.org, "svn-ports-all@FreeBSD.org" <svn-ports-all@freebsd.org>, "svn-ports-head@FreeBSD.org" <svn-ports-head@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r407270 - head/ports-mgmt/portmaster Message-ID: <56A896C1.305@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20160127095927.GA64137@FreeBSD.org> References: <201601261123.u0QBNcvL091258@repo.freebsd.org> <CAFY%2ByEkOv9-JaJv45WF-GzTxOiFh6k8sZ4rysUS5xTZs=rWNrA@mail.gmail.com> <56A86CAD.7030507@marino.st> <56A8747E.5080703@FreeBSD.org> <20160127081700.GA20812@FreeBSD.org> <56A87FCE.6080305@FreeBSD.org> <20160127084230.GA28230@FreeBSD.org> <56A88489.5020507@FreeBSD.org> <20160127093601.GA54242@FreeBSD.org> <56A893D9.8000504@FreeBSD.org> <20160127095927.GA64137@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 27/01/2016 8:59 PM, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > OK, still does not imply that it will evicted, while EXPIRATION_DATE does. In other projects it does, in ours it implies it 'by definition', even if it doesn't mean it (in effect). That ambiguity (in effect) is *exactly* why I reckon ALERT/NOTICE/WARNING/FOO is better. > I prefer software that says forever (well, as long as the Ports Tree and > FreeBSD themselves). Unconditionally EOLing ports on their inception is > IMHO atrocious (in reply to adjacent email). Stating that there is an EOL date, and saying something is EOL *now*, are different. If we had the ability to distinguish between the two, there wouldn't be an issue. Right now we can't, or it doesn't make sense because our DEPRECATED/EXPIRES are loaded in the sense that they imply "NOW", which again is exactly what I was getting at.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?56A896C1.305>