Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 14:23:51 -0800 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: d@delphij.net Cc: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org>, Martin Wilke <miwi@FreeBSD.org>, Stanislav Sedov <stas@deglitch.com>, ports@FreeBSD.org, Dmitry Marakasov <amdmi3@amdmi3.ru>, Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>, Xin LI <delphij@delphij.net> Subject: Re: Recent ports removal Message-ID: <4EBDA077.5070105@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4EBD9E6F.3040708@delphij.net> References: <20111109124325.17efc0d1.stas@deglitch.com> <20111109222435.GD92221@azathoth.lan> <20111110110637.GA3514@hades.panopticon> <4EBCC587.10701@FreeBSD.org> <20111111100708.GA24126@hades.panopticon> <20111111124012.3ec48cb3.stas@deglitch.com> <20111111213817.GB8896@lonesome.com> <4EBD9E6F.3040708@delphij.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 11/11/2011 14:15, Xin LI wrote: > (I just picked one message to do a reply-all, not specific to any one > single message but all of them). > > Technically speaking the current approach's problem is that the user > might have no chance of seeing it before the port is removed. That's going to be true no matter what approach we use, or what time period we choose. There are plenty of boxes that just sit there happily doing their work without being updated. If that's the case, then the fact that a port is deprecated or removed isn't really a problem for them. Vulnerable ports are a different issue, but we have portaudit for that. > By its > nature, deprecated ports tends not to be updated for long time, port > tools like portmaster, portupgrade will not even see it because no > PORTREVISION bump happen. portmaster -L will warn you about ports marked DEPRECATED/FORBIDDEN/IGNORE/BROKEN if you run it against an updated ports tree. One area where we actually can improve here is to also put this information in the INDEX. I have an idea for that, just haven't been able to put the time into making it happen. > For users who install from packages, there > is no deprecation message at all, and it's pretty likely that these > user when updating to a new version suddenly find the software missing. I would think that the lack of a package would be a pretty clear message that there is an issue that needs attention, wouldn't you? :) Perhaps we need to rethink the policy on whether packages should be created for deprecated ports. > I think if we want to deprecate ports in a constant manner, we need to > do a better job of letting the user (or let's say potential > contributor) know it. I think you're right that we can do more, so what is your proposal? Doug -- "We could put the whole Internet into a book." "Too practical." Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4EBDA077.5070105>