Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2018 01:24:34 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 232058] mail/mutt-lite: Request to restore port Message-ID: <bug-232058-7788-cb2wOqj5yx@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-232058-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-232058-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D232058 Derek Schrock <dereks@lifeofadishwasher.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|maintainer-feedback?(dereks |maintainer-feedback+ |@lifeofadishwasher.com) | --- Comment #2 from Derek Schrock <dereks@lifeofadishwasher.com> --- I did take this into account when removing the port by using the total numb= er of *-lite ports. There were very few *-lite (*-tiny and *-nox11 only adds a couple more) so I felt removing this was low risk thinking that *-lite ports were not as popular. Being this is the first PR and mailing list post (at least for mutt related items) I'd like to guess mail/mutt-lite isn't very popular at least for head ports or latest pkg users. The next test would be at the start of the quarterly release. It's possible the expiration date was just too low and should have been at least 4 maybe 6 months to get a better feel of mail/mutt-lite users. Looking at other ports deprecation reasons most are EOL/upstream related wh= ile some are "moved to cat/here." I feel this case would maybe be a flavor of = the latter.=20=20 Looking back a port revision bump should have happened such that forcing a rebuild of mail/mutt-lite such that a pkg upgrade would have installed a version of the package with the expiration and deprecation message either w= hen installed or via 'pkg annotate -a -S deprecated' that runs on a nightly bas= is via pkg's periodic scripts. So yes it was a valid complaint that you didn= 't get any notifications if you already had 1.10.1 installed. I would rather not have a lite version of mutt and continue to support an option less install. However, if someone from portmgr@ feels this deprecat= ion was done in error I'd be in favor of bringing mail/mutt-lite back either wi= th a longer expiration date or a removal of the deprecation completely. Fortunately I wasn't going to do the LITE clean up on the main port until t= he next update of mutt. According to the mutt mailing list this is going to happen in ~2 weeks. So in theory if MOVED was updated and the old mail/mutt-lite port was brought back it should just work. Jeremy even though you're not using ports directly you can indirectly use p= orts via poudriere and add that local poudriere repo to your repo list. I understand this might not scale for some cases however it's an option if mail/mutt-lite wasn't brought back. --=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-cb2wOqj5yx>