Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 18:40:46 +1100 From: Kubilay Kocak <koobs@FreeBSD.org> To: marino@freebsd.org, Martin Wilke <miwi.fbsd@gmail.com> Cc: 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: <56A8747E.5080703@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <56A86CAD.7030507@marino.st> References: <201601261123.u0QBNcvL091258@repo.freebsd.org> <CAFY%2ByEkOv9-JaJv45WF-GzTxOiFh6k8sZ4rysUS5xTZs=rWNrA@mail.gmail.com> <56A86CAD.7030507@marino.st>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 27/01/2016 6:07 PM, John Marino wrote: > As I said previously, this commit does not do anything except warn the > user about portmaster so they are aware of the serious performance and > maintenance issues that it has. There is no expiration date. This statement is false. The change also adds a recommendation preferentially for a particular replacement for both tier one architectures. Given you are the author of the recommended package, this is biased at best, if not a conflict of interest. I find no issue with notifying users that portmaster is *currently* unmaintained and has open issues, and that support can't *currently* be provided for it. However, I don't believe we ought take actions that hasten its demise. In fact, I believe a statement to the effect that we *want* someone to take maintainership in order to avoid further bitrot would be worthwhile. Given what the term 'deprecated' implies, I would use a pre-everything: message instead.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?56A8747E.5080703>