Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 18 Feb 2004 17:33:09 -0600 (CST)
From:      Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>
To:        Norikatsu Shigemura <nork@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        Adam Weinberger <adamw@magnesium.net>
Subject:   Re: www/flashpluginwrapper
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.44.0402181728330.29114-100000@pancho>
In-Reply-To: <200402181358.i1IDw5Xh050695@sakura.ninth-nine.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 	Is this OK?

I was following your lead, so anything that's decided is fine
with me.

Perhaps some of these deprecated messages should be generalized
to say "not recommended for new installations: use XYZ instead."

My idea for instituting the deprecations is not to remove any
existing functionality.  My idea is to try to "take out the
garbage" in the ports collection -- I think we would all agree
that there is some -- it's just a question of what constitues
"garbage".

I'm really more interested in things that, e.g., stand no chance of
ever working on 5.3, or haven't fetched in 3 years, or are otherwise
abandonware.

mcl



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.44.0402181728330.29114-100000>