From owner-svn-ports-all@freebsd.org Wed Jan 27 08:17:00 2016 Return-Path: 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 8981DA46448; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 08:17:00 +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 7FE07199E; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 08:17:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033) id 7D0DA1367; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 08:17:00 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 08:17:00 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: Kubilay Kocak Cc: marino@freebsd.org, Martin Wilke , 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: <20160127081700.GA20812@FreeBSD.org> References: <201601261123.u0QBNcvL091258@repo.freebsd.org> <56A86CAD.7030507@marino.st> <56A8747E.5080703@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <56A8747E.5080703@FreeBSD.org> 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 08:17:00 -0000 On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 06:40:46PM +1100, Kubilay Kocak wrote: > I find no issue with notifying users that portmaster is *currently* > unmaintained and has open issues, and that support can't *currently* > be provided for it. > > However, I don't believe we ought take actions that hasten its demise. > In fact, I believe a statement to the effect that we *want* someone to > take maintainership in order to avoid further bitrot would be > worthwhile. It's funny how easily we deprecate some things (G2, KDE3, pre-KMS X.org, etc.) yet *want* someone to take maintainership in order to avoid further bitrot of broken and inferior reimplementation of portupgrade. :-) > Given what the term 'deprecated' implies, I would use a pre-everything: > message instead. That's a good idea actually. ./danfe