Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 16:44:05 -0600 From: Chad Perrin <code@apotheon.net> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: sysutils/cfs Message-ID: <20110910224405.GA24612@guilt.hydra> In-Reply-To: <4E6BCADF.3080909@gmx.de> References: <4E67935C.6080702@aldan.algebra.com> <CADLo838QkAjq2jPXy_c5MTYW09tZJMvWTNndo3Pnfa3=1c-5Og@mail.gmail.com> <4E68AC85.4060705@icritical.com> <4E68F34C.6090504@FreeBSD.org> <20110909040954.17733a4e@cox.net> <4E6A476D.7090800@gmx.de> <4e6b6f41.hI3BQG0rpsUjddcD%perryh@pluto.rain.com> <4E6B374C.5040302@gmx.de> <20110910161736.GB23457@guilt.hydra> <4E6BCADF.3080909@gmx.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--k1lZvvs/B4yU6o8G Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 10:38:55PM +0200, Matthias Andree wrote: > Am 10.09.2011 18:17, schrieb Chad Perrin: > > On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 12:09:16PM +0200, Matthias Andree wrote: > >> > >> On the other hand, you're pointing out a problem of dead ports in the > >> first place: if the API of (usually library) port Y changes, and port X > >> is unmaintained, that's typically a situation where port X needs to be > >> deprecated and removed (and also will no longer build and/or work). > >=20 > > I want to understand all the reasoning behind this stuff. Please expla= in > > the reason that library Y changing means that dependent port X should be > > deprecated and removed, regardless of whether it no longer builds and/or > > works. Note that I'm working on the assumption that your assertion it > > should be deprecated and removed does not rely on it no longer building > > and/or working because of the way you mentioned no longering building > > and/or working as a parenthetical addendum rather than a condition of > > deprecation and removal. >=20 > I suppose you missed the meaning of "if the API of port Y changes". > API =3D application programming interface. This implies that either the > application no longer builds, or it is known that it would behave > inappropriately with the new library (because semantics changed). That would have been an unwarranted assumption. If the API changes, it might mean a couple of changes were made -- and they do not affect the parts of the API that port X uses. I chose to take what you said at face value, rather than make a bunch of assumptions about it. Thanks for clearing up your intended meaning, though. --=20 Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] --k1lZvvs/B4yU6o8G Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAk5r6DUACgkQ9mn/Pj01uKVWIgCg3HT6p66wo1nOVJ48FeV8RPqE U34AoKW+Jrr7KdtqdqOuJEODC96L0RTK =3znB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --k1lZvvs/B4yU6o8G--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110910224405.GA24612>