Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 11 Apr 2015 18:03:24 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 199333] graphics/pdf2svg UNBREAK - add MASTER_SITES
Message-ID:  <bug-199333-13-0CQEtMAj9j@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-199333-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-199333-13@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=199333

--- Comment #11 from John Marino <marino@FreeBSD.org> ---
(In reply to Chris Hutchinson from comment #10)
> Should I find my list growing beyond my ability to give them the
> attention they deserve/require, I can/will give them back to ports@ :)

Unfortunately, this is the exact scenario that I fear.  People want port X to
die because they are sick of it.  Then if you claim it, we pretty much have to
assign it to you, but if then release it later on, it's going to hang around
until it's finally deprecated again.  In this scenario, people would rather it
just die instead of coming back in unmaintained.  I know you are coming from it
with the Point of View that you are doing everyone a favor, but hopefully now
you can see it's not always viewed as a positive thing.  This is why I have
been recommending that you limit this to ports you actually use.


> In going through the list, I found ports that while *seemingly*
> somewhat obscure, appeared to have value. To *me* anyway.


I interpret the above as a confirmation that I was right -- that you don't
actually use the port, but somehow it appears valuable and worth saving anyway.
 This is the situation I was warning against.  We have all the ports in version
control, so any can be revived if somebody actually wants it.

> I have no desire to take a port from anyone that is a Maintainer. But
> after a bit of investigation, those that I substituted myself for,
> appeared to have been using distcache for some time -- often for more than
> a year.


Well, please that the file wasn't just moved on the same server (as in this
case) or if the exact same file is readily available somewhere else.  The
length it was pulling from distcache really doesn't indicate anything -- only
that nobody noticed.

Thanks

-- 
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-199333-13-0CQEtMAj9j>