Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2017 15:33:42 -0600 From: Adam Weinberger <adamw@adamw.org> To: Yasuhiro KIMURA <yasu@utahime.org> Cc: portmgr@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Official opinion about new py3- port Message-ID: <29D51ECB-4248-4D8E-BE3C-85944AD36D3E@adamw.org> In-Reply-To: <20170810.060816.949087463497216767.yasu@utahime.org> References: <20170810.060816.949087463497216767.yasu@utahime.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 9 Aug, 2017, at 15:08, Yasuhiro KIMURA <yasu@utahime.org> wrote: >=20 > Dear portmgr. >=20 > Would you mind my asking your official opinion about new py3- port? >=20 > When I submitted new mail/py3-authres port, it was rejected with > following comment: >=20 > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D220702#c2 >=20 >> FYI, we no longer accept adding new py3- ports. FreeBSD will add >> flavored package support instead. >=20 > But today I found new security/py3-ecdsa port is committed, which > conflicts with it. >=20 > https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=3Drevision&revision=3D447640 >=20 > I would like to make it clear because if new py3- port is permitted it > provides another solution to the problem about > mail/postfix-policyd-spf-python update. >=20 > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D220706 >=20 > With best regards. An exception does exist for when a py3 port is a required dependency, = which it sounds like is the case here. Can you confirm that the current = ports postfix-policyd-spf-python (1.3.2) fails on python 3.6? # Adam --=20 Adam Weinberger adamw@adamw.org https://www.adamw.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?29D51ECB-4248-4D8E-BE3C-85944AD36D3E>