From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 19 05:50:44 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72A4F16A4CE for ; Wed, 19 May 2004 05:50:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 696B143D41 for ; Wed, 19 May 2004 05:50:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) i4JCoZ0X044663 for ; Wed, 19 May 2004 05:50:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i4JCoZB5044662; Wed, 19 May 2004 05:50:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats) Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 05:50:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200405191250.i4JCoZB5044662@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Oliver Eikemeier Subject: Re: ports/66872: [PATCH] security/siphon: mark deprecated, as the project has been dead for a while X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Oliver Eikemeier List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 12:50:44 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/66872; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Oliver Eikemeier To: Stefan Walter Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/66872: [PATCH] security/siphon: mark deprecated, as the project has been dead for a while Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 14:45:58 +0200 Stefan Walter wrote: >>Description: > > Mark this port deprecated, with an expiration date of 2004-06-18, so > it'll be removed during the next ports tree cleanup. > > As mentioned on ports@, the project has been dead for quite a while now, > and there are better and more up to date tools in the ports tree. Thanks for your submission. You might want to cite the reasons here again, or at least a link to the relevant post on ports@ so that the reasons for removal can be easily reproduced by looking at the PR number (which is in the CVS commit message). -Oliver