Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 08:32:00 -0300 From: Renato Botelho <rbgarga@gmail.com> To: "David E. Thiel" <lx@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Dead projects in ports tree Message-ID: <747dc8f30903030332n415709c7h6719bdb01ed4e543@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20090302223600.GD29616@redundancy.redundancy.org> References: <7d6fde3d0902281509v6a98521as618421daf52b3abe@mail.gmail.com> <7d6fde3d0902281605u2a251513q44ccfc0c8226c9fd@mail.gmail.com> <20090302223600.GD29616@redundancy.redundancy.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 7:36 PM, David E. Thiel <lx@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 04:05:56PM -0800, Garrett Cooper wrote: >> > multimedia/openquicktime - no movement in CVS / SVN for 1+ years; no >> > releases in the past 3 years >> > >> > =A0 =A0I'll continue posting more items to this thread as I find them.= .. >> > Thanks, >> > -Garrett >> >> xmms looks completely dead now. Can someone confirm or deny this fact? > > While I'm in favor of removing useless ports, there are several projects > which are simply "done", and lack of development doesn't mean they're > obsolete or useless. The logic above would seem to suggest we should > remove qmail too. I would like to hear what people feel the best method > for getting rid of unused and irrelevant ports, though -- bump > portrevision and mark BROKEN for a few months? Qmail doesn't have a new version for a long time, i know, but new version of patch collection are released, like you can see las spamcontrol 2.5.x, and author is working on 2.6.x with a lot of new features, so, i don't consider qmail a dead project at all. And, there are a good number of qmail users, i don't think it's a good idea remove this port, i'm maintaining it for some years and i can still maintai= n and keep it working on ports infrastructure. --=20 Renato Botelho
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?747dc8f30903030332n415709c7h6719bdb01ed4e543>