Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 1 May 2011 17:31:11 +0100
From:      Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com>
To:        mato <gamato@users.sf.net>
Cc:        freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org, Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@acm.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: expiration of net/skype ?!
Message-ID:  <BANLkTin2f5b_%2Bt1j=0hR2OjYO-8b8JGxYA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4DBD0B40.8010101@users.sf.net>
References:  <BANLkTimQRFnDjY5g9tR%2B1VXDBQiXZ-EvxQ@mail.gmail.com> <4DBD0B40.8010101@users.sf.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 1 May 2011 08:26, mato <gamato@users.sf.net> wrote:
> Chris Rees wrote:
>> Mato wrote:
>> > Ok, from my understanding it wouldn't be the first time a port distfil=
e
>> > is not (easily) available yet the port itself works if one can get the
>> > distfile. =A0And it's very easy to search successfully the interwebs f=
or this
>> > particular distfile. =A0In such a case I see no reason to remove the p=
ort if
>> > it works (under condition one gets the distfile). =A0I myself have it =
(and I
>> > even host it privately). =A0And reading mailing lists reveals there ar=
e many
>> > people using the port.
>> >
>>
>> If one is capable of finding a distfile it's a trivial addition to find
>> the port.
>>
>> Rather than having defective ports in the tree, perhaps you could host t=
he
>> Skype shar? With a decent title it'll probably show up early enough on a
>> Google search.
>>
>> Chris
>>
>
> That is one of possibilities. =A0The question is whether we want to lower
> barriers for new / common users or not. =A0Experience suggests that peopl=
e
> will choose a different solution if it makes their life easier. =A0See my
> other recent post please.
>

Unfortunately, until the port is updated this will not be 'undeprecated'.

It is not general policy to allow manual fetches unless a seriously
major (ie Java) component requires it. Skype does not fit that mould;
there are plenty of viable alternatives.

I'm not trying to brush you off; I'm just pointing out that the
Project will not deliberately
breach licensing conditions to make things easier for new users,
neither is there a
'probably broken' part of the Ports tree -- the closest thing to a
different repo is a separate tree,
for example [1].

Chris

[1] http://code.google.com/p/freebsd-texlive/



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BANLkTin2f5b_%2Bt1j=0hR2OjYO-8b8JGxYA>