From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 30 18:04:53 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::35]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50556106566B; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 18:04:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from 172-17-198-245.globalsuite.net (hub.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::36]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF4A02043F6; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 18:04:52 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4E8604C4.5070804@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 11:04:52 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:7.0) Gecko/20110928 Thunderbird/7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ruslan Mahmatkhanov References: <4E858E86.4010402@yandex.ru> <4E8590CD.8050005@FreeBSD.org> <4E8591E5.6010005@yandex.ru> In-Reply-To: <4E8591E5.6010005@yandex.ru> X-Enigmail-Version: undefined OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: FreeBSD Ports Mailing List , Julien Laffaye Subject: Re: recent ports removal X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 18:04:53 -0000 On 09/30/2011 02:54, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote: > Doug Barton wrote on 30.09.2011 13:50: >> On 09/30/2011 02:40, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote: >>> Hi, Doug. >>> >>> You just removed www/pyblosxom. But we have a pr, that update it to >>> latest (not-vulnerable) version: http://bugs.freebsd.org/160682. >> >> Julien took that PR, when he's ready to do the update he can pull the >> files out of the Attic. >> >> >> Doug > > Ok, but as far i recall, there in ports@ was sounded a policy like "we > do not remove the ports with open pr's on them". I think you misunderstand what "remove" means in this context. :) Or perhaps you've never worked with a version control system ... It's honestly hard for me to understand why it's hard for people to understand this concept. When Julien is ready to do his work all he has to do is type 'cvs co -D 2011-09-29 ports/www/pyblosxom ports/www/Makefile' and then do his thing. Because a port has been "removed" today is completely irrelevant to the possibility that it will come back in a non-vulnerable form tomorrow. Meanwhile, at one point in the past I did do a PR check for most if not all of the ports that I removed, and I have committed several updates from maintainers of ports that I had marked FORBIDDEN/DEPRECATED. In this case because Julien took that PR I assume that he has some sort of special knowledge/interest in the port, and is in the best position to deal with it, so I am deferring to his judgement. In the meantime removing it on schedule is the safest course of action. hth, Doug -- Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much. -- OK Go Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/