From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Dec 13 02:12:18 2007
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D19C16A468
	for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 02:12:18 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com)
Received: from mail.soaustin.net (lefty.soaustin.net [66.135.55.46])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3185E13C4FD
	for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 02:12:17 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com)
Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502)
	id 5C9128C0FC; Wed, 12 Dec 2007 20:12:17 -0600 (CST)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 20:12:17 -0600
To: Mikhail Teterin <mi+mill@aldan.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <20071213021217.GA3535@soaustin.net>
References: <20071212213200.D576216A469@hub.freebsd.org>
	<200712121701.57460.mi+mill@aldan.algebra.com>
	<20071212183542.f9bf5e55.wmoran@potentialtech.com>
	<200712121930.46708.mi+mill@aldan.algebra.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200712121930.46708.mi+mill@aldan.algebra.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
From: linimon@lonesome.com (Mark Linimon)
Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Ion3 removal (Re: Ion3 license violation)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 02:12:18 -0000

On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 07:30:46PM -0500, Mikhail Teterin wrote:
> I expect the port-removal to be initiated/done in an orderly fashion.

Claims of license violations absolutely trump any "process requirements".
portmgr has the explicit task of keeping the Ports Collection in as
best a legal state as possible.

Further, note that my initial commit tried to do this, and I asked the
author if it was acceptable.  It was clear from his reply that it was
not -- especially considering the following history:

http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-pkg/2007/10/28/0000.html

Anyone interested in this thread needs to go read that one first.

mcl