From owner-svn-ports-all@freebsd.org  Wed Jan 27 07:24:44 2016
Return-Path: <owner-svn-ports-all@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: svn-ports-all@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5343BA6F167;
 Wed, 27 Jan 2016 07:24:44 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org)
Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A2711C92;
 Wed, 27 Jan 2016 07:24:44 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org)
Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033)
 id 47D8D14C9; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 07:24:44 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 07:24:44 +0000
From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To: marino@freebsd.org
Cc: Adam Weinberger <adamw@adamw.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org,
 svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r407270 - head/ports-mgmt/portmaster
Message-ID: <20160127072444.GA95393@FreeBSD.org>
References: <201601261123.u0QBNcvL091258@repo.freebsd.org>
 <FFDB388E-185C-4A8C-A90A-C61F813B2856@adamw.org>
 <56A86A88.1070908@marino.st>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <56A86A88.1070908@marino.st>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
X-BeenThere: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree <svn-ports-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/svn-ports-all>,
 <mailto:svn-ports-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-ports-all/>
List-Post: <mailto:svn-ports-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:svn-ports-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-ports-all>,
 <mailto:svn-ports-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 07:24:44 -0000

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 07:58:16AM +0100, John Marino wrote:
> 1) You are aware that all the commit does is add a warning to portmaster
> right?  So "the decision" is whether people should be warned that
> portmaster doesn't work needs to be a major group discussion.
> 
> 2) no, portmaster does NOT work as intended.  It is full of bugs and
> people are constantly reporting issues with it.

+1 on deprecating portmaster.  I've never seen a reason for its existence
given that portupgrade is much more robust, featurerich, and intuitive to
use (I was not aware that portmaster is so buggy since it never actually
worked for me, just kept asking questions).

The fact is that we have to provide nearly identical set of commands for
both portupgrade and portmaster in UPDATING is ridiculous.  May portmaster
rest finally in peace please?

./danfe