From owner-svn-ports-all@freebsd.org Wed Jan 27 08:47:53 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 7FE48A6F87C; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 08:47:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd.contact@marino.st) Received: from shepard.synsport.net (mail.synsport.com [208.69.230.148]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E387157C; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 08:47:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd.contact@marino.st) Received: from [192.168.1.21] (248.Red-83-39-200.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net [83.39.200.248]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shepard.synsport.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B472A43BB9; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 02:47:50 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: svn commit: r407270 - head/ports-mgmt/portmaster To: koobs@FreeBSD.org, Martin Wilke References: <201601261123.u0QBNcvL091258@repo.freebsd.org> <56A86CAD.7030507@marino.st> <56A8747E.5080703@FreeBSD.org> <56A87EC8.7060401@marino.st> <56A881F0.4040103@FreeBSD.org> Cc: ports-committers@freebsd.org, "svn-ports-all@FreeBSD.org" , "svn-ports-head@FreeBSD.org" From: John Marino X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110 Reply-To: marino@freebsd.org Message-ID: <56A88434.3080407@marino.st> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:47:48 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56A881F0.4040103@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 08:47:53 -0000 On 1/27/2016 9:38 AM, Kubilay Kocak wrote: >> Wait, so you are saying we should tell people things are deprecated >> without recommendations about what to do about it? > > No, that is not what was claimed. > > What was said (as per the quoted text above), was that the > recommendation was preferential, biased at best, if not a conflict of > interest. Nowhere does it say or claim that recommendations should not > be provided. Yes, I am biased. I listed the two (and in the case of T2 platforms) one option to migrate. I did not list portupgrade because I was under the assumption it wasn't in great shape, but based on danfe's contribution, maybe portupgrade should be added to the message. Is the message accurate if it were committed by an unbiased person? If yes, then the bias is irrelevant. I made an honest attempt at a good deprecation message. The fact that I made it doesn't invalidate the message. >> 2) this port does not need a maintainer, it needs a DEVELOPER. > > Nit picking, since both previous maintainers also developed it. > > But yes, agreed, it would need a 'developer' to 'maintain it'. I'm not nit-picking. THere is a distinction. A maintainer can be limited to making sure it builds, sending PR upstream, handling patches, etc. A developer has to write and fix code. It's a major level higher. I am not being pedantic, I think the level of developer is needed here. Bryan was qualified. The next guy has to be equally qualified. >> 4) Actually there is a non-signficant faction that would very much like >> to see portmaster dead, mainly for the reasons 1-3. > > Digression from the main issue and irrelevant to why people have > responded to this change. It is not a digression. It's a direct response to "let's not hasten demise" -- that's exactly what some people want to do so why tells them not to? > > Also, it's perfectly possible to not want a port DEPRECATED, and not be > 'pro' that-port. obviously, but that voice is weak. Portmaster ownership has to be addressed and saying "don't do it" without offering a solution is not contributing anything. And frankly, that case is also likely that the person saying these things isn't fully informed. It's easy to say, "keep it" when it's no skin off your nose. I'm saying, put some skin in the game.