Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 17:13:16 +0300 From: Franco Fichtner <franco@lastsummer.de> To: Adam Weinberger <adamw@adamw.org> Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Martin_Waschb=C3=BCsch?= <martin@waschbuesch.de>, FreeBSD Ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: PHP version retirement Message-ID: <705E8D0E-F558-4ABE-B771-1BB273397766@lastsummer.de> In-Reply-To: <CAP7rwcgJ9gReDfECqSLbHKxK5Y86guJSA0pq68pRjwp0eXt%2B8A@mail.gmail.com> References: <CF1F28D6-1072-4BE6-B124-A97DE43FA4E6@waschbuesch.de> <64faf143-bae3-378c-3ee2-b196c2ea4111@astart.com> <16731AF5-68E9-4E41-8D21-CF5917BE32A4@waschbuesch.de> <20190810231216.GA23293@lyxys.ka.sub.org> <CD11C7D8-DC57-4402-848C-06BBAD220D8B@waschbuesch.de> <D7D5D66C-AD53-4F2E-95E5-F0131DBC82AA@lastsummer.de> <CAP7rwcjR8SYmeJJe9KrmZRJj7qQpnjQ6N8kaqrdpDSDB4cFH6g@mail.gmail.com> <C6261FE6-1FAD-44D1-BD06-B33A0CEAAC85@waschbuesch.de> <CAP7rwcg%2B2GeMLz1a%2B-abcjNcA_-mE3B%2Bh5ovC5iU03EKiHbAZg@mail.gmail.com> <2DE6652A-86FF-4F07-9F8D-97E845D41E41@waschbuesch.de> <CAP7rwcgJ9gReDfECqSLbHKxK5Y86guJSA0pq68pRjwp0eXt%2B8A@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 12. Aug 2019, at 16:29, Adam Weinberger <adamw@adamw.org> wrote: >=20 > On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 1:04 AM Martin Waschb=C3=BCsch <martin@waschbuesch= .de> wrote: >>>>>> Furthermore, the argument that it is more more work to maintain an ab= andoned version is silly because it=E2=80=99s more work to delete a port tha= t to just keep it in the tree for a while longer. >>>>>=20 >>>>> That last part isn't correct. The work of deleting the ports is >>>>> largely automated and simple, and it will always happen eventually. >>>>> The work involved is in supporting unsupported versions. Our php team >>>>> is spread very thin, and they simply cannot support php versions >>>>> outside of upstream development. There are no resources to backport >>>>> fixes that may or may not be designed to work with older versions >>>>=20 >>>> I do not understand this. At all. >>>> And I sort of hope I misunderstood you, because it sounds like you thin= k a maintainer is or may be regarded as someone who can be expected to provi= de product support of some kind? >>>> I find that notion worrying to say the least. >>>=20 >>> If you believe that handling updates, analyzing submitted and upstream >>> patches and development, and answering a bevy of questions for every >>> major update is effortless, then you drastically underestimate the >>> amount of work that goes into the ports tree. >>=20 >> You completely misunderstand me. >> I know there is a lot of effort going into this. I disagree only in that I= do not believe there should be any expectations towards maintainers. >> It is voluntary work. Spare time, etc. I am grateful for the effort peopl= e put into this, but I strongly believe no one should act towards volunteers= with any expectations as to what they should do, how much time they spend, e= tc. >>=20 >> So, I find it wrong to say, as I understood you, to remove a package from= the ports tree because otherwise others people, for instance users of FreeB= SD, would have the *expectation* of receiving support for those packages. >> That perception of any kind of entitlement towards volunteers is wrong, I= MHO. >>=20 >> And that is why I answered that part of your message because it is not (f= or reasons stated above) a valid argument against having outdated software i= n the ports tree. >=20 > Ah! You're right, I did completely misunderstand you. >=20 > You're correct that we don't provide any semblance of support for the > upstream software. Absolutely, and under no circumstances should > anyone have to. >=20 > I'm referring to support of the port itself. Maintainership requires > responding to private emails asking for help; evaluating, testing, and > approving submitted patches; responding to PRs about changes or fixes > or poor behaviour (90% of the time related to portmaster); responding > to error reports; and so on. >=20 > We do expect those things from maintainers, because those are what are > required to keep the ports tree running. And we actively drop > maintainership from ports where maintainers routinely ignore those > responsibilities, regardless of whether they have a commit bit. >=20 > As decke noted, maintainership of a small port with relatively low > deployment is pretty smooth (and don't get me wrong, they're as or > more important than the big packages). But a huge and complex > framework like php is a massive undertaking, with a near-constant > barrage of complex patches that require highly complex testing > strategies, and thousands of dependent ports to worry about for every > change. Sure, if you feel like that is so there is no need to argue about it. I stil= l feel the latent drift of =E2=80=9Cphp is high profile and low profile is e= asy=E2=80=9D like a sneaky way out of a fruitful discussion ignoring the req= uest made by users: don=E2=80=99t kill software on tight schedules if there i= s no technical need for it. Unless you want to state a valid technical reason. For PHP 5.6 removal espec= ially one has to assume that general arguments are merely made up here to fi= t the general lack of disagreement on the grace period issue. That=E2=80=99s fine and easier to say you don=E2=80=99t want to do it vs. it= cannot be done. :) > I suggested that it might be possible for stale languages to remain in > the tree, as long as the above support wasn't required or expected. > But, honestly, Franco's response mocking the offer made my desire to > help him somewhere at or below zero, and has pretty much ensured that > nobody else in portmgr is going to be eager to get skin in the game. I=E2=80=98m merely pointing out you=E2=80=98re unwilling to do it and your o= ffer was impractical for users running any PHP extension but you were not st= raight forward in your answer previously. This segment at least makes it cle= ar so thank you for being frank about it. To sum it up there is no desire by= maintainers to do what users requested here so yay for that conclusion at l= east. Cheers, Franco
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?705E8D0E-F558-4ABE-B771-1BB273397766>