From owner-freebsd-x11@freebsd.org Mon Oct 29 10:30:52 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-x11@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B70B10D2A2A for ; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 10:30:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 386296AEC2 for ; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 10:30:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id F19BF10D2A29; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 10:30:51 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: x11@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E05FB10D2A28 for ; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 10:30:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 815776AEBD for ; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 10:30:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B86886C98 for ; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 10:30:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id w9TAUoMR018105 for ; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 10:30:50 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id w9TAUo7L018102 for x11@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 10:30:50 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: x11@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 232767] x11-toolkits/wlc: remove port Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 10:30:50 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Ports & Packages X-Bugzilla-Component: Individual Port(s) X-Bugzilla-Version: Latest X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: jbeich@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: In Progress X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: x11@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: maintainer-feedback? X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: X11 on FreeBSD -- maintaining and support List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 10:30:52 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D232767 --- Comment #4 from Jan Beich --- (In reply to Johannes Lundberg from comment #3) > A Sway port was done but never committed so there are users outside the t= ree. Do you mean review D13431? It depends on bug 224202 which you've abandoned.= If there's no plan to land it then the port has no users in the current shape. External repositories like the one Greg V maintains can revert removal or update Sway port to a version that depends on wlroots. > When we get to doing all the Wayland stuff, let's also get wlroots and sw= ay > into ports and remove this one.=20 Bug 227509 tries to avoid bitrot. Either stuff is maintained or purged from= the tree. Wayland compositors are outside of scope there and may lead to inflow= of Wayland-related bug reports which x11@ cannot handle yet. OTOH, an option enabled by default can still be disabled by users that care about the numbe= r of dependencies. > All Wayland related ports are still early alpha stage so don't rush into = any > conclusions. Why not work in parallel? For one, I want the headache of support of non-default options gone from my ports. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=