Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2018 00:26:04 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 232058] mail/mutt-lite: restore this port Message-ID: <bug-232058-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D232058 Bug ID: 232058 Summary: mail/mutt-lite: restore this port Product: Ports & Packages Version: Latest Hardware: Any OS: Any Status: New Severity: Affects Only Me Priority: --- Component: Individual Port(s) Assignee: ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Reporter: jdc@koitsu.org Today I found the following: mutt-lite-1.10.1 ? orphaned: mail/mutt-lite This correlates with r481126: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=3Drevision&revision=3D481126 2018-10-01 mail/mutt-lite: For a lite version of mutt build mail/mutt with = less (or zero) options Which makes no mention of the history or PR, which I had to dig up myself in r476197: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=3Drevision&revision=3D476197 Which claims "give users 2 months to move to mail/mutt". I saw absolutely = no message/warning about this deprecation, which indicates that the implementa= tion of said warning was done in such a way that **did not** take people using p= kg (binary packages) into mind. Proof is here, indicating that only people who built from ports (source) would see this warning: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/head/mail/mutt-lite/Makefile?r1=3D476197&r= 2=3D476196&pathrev=3D476197 Bug 229938 looks like the maintainer of the port decided to relinquish maintainership (which is 100% fine! It can go to ports@ in the meantime), = and instead opted... for its entire removal?! What was done here is not good practise ports-wise; not everyone installs ports, most people use binary packages, which means "build mail/mutt with l= ess or zero options" it not an option/choice available to them. It's scaring me how people don't seem to understand the relationship between ports and pkg.= I don't know how any of this was permitted by portmgr; it is not common pract= ise for port deprecation to work this way. Please either: a) Undo this change (probably not feasible given r476197), or, b) Create a stub port that includes fewer options as described. (This is exactly how tons of the *-lite, *-tiny, and *-nox11 ports work.) --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-232058-7788>