From owner-svn-ports-all@freebsd.org Wed Jan 27 10:07:07 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 ED261A6FFF9; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 10:07:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from koobs.freebsd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-pa0-x230.google.com (mail-pa0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ABEBB1A36; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 10:07:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from koobs.freebsd@gmail.com) Received: by mail-pa0-x230.google.com with SMTP id cy9so2519265pac.0; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 02:07:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:reply-to:subject:references:to:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=2c6f5xXrX4vZEBTxoL5F0ry3NWRNa2V/VD217oO/ik4=; b=cjrv8A6PRrSnnnOqNsiHxZj2UAcQaHBND8psXtfYRP8usDVWoAhXJ5f4yqgek1EXJ0 JMk44Nvf7IqrBSMWDjV5wVn+vA6cSTTzLW36loTxZIhwzR9aRw9ePWZ4Lksf5UP8H5Kt voZMIB6o8DcLN7Syvs4iuzLyzyu5r0tS1NvqhpVVvtrwzAB+fybeNrq550q/Z5fJOprS M5h6+iKVLjbMHVERWwDgng/7rZFtwaKhLR87vfFqQhGaK95blvZi6ZLhoFowInBQS4EY SfRoxavRp6pHcayFSRwNv4+h5WjPz6Bc8PwYvd46GCysDSAQ5czGxISK9XzqGocsetAH /YWA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:reply-to:subject:references:to:cc:from :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=2c6f5xXrX4vZEBTxoL5F0ry3NWRNa2V/VD217oO/ik4=; b=cU2Fvq+1+5NPIitR6SQRR2lotJyLZ3j1qynZK9rENtPd3QvV/bMPm9c+JXAnXgQ2Q4 rH0AELqAqsylcp4Gf5f8vKxKTptMAiV0o6gJbnF/p6CZQ25xamxW/6BT3FHsLXbebZab Wxn/2l4SwlYG+m9DLkzFEwQ1KLkdSTNlcPhz+sa2rdZztA8nMQV07iHLWEIBqybGVk3S KVwPRby16r0BZXReroJC6vVL2gpcFypWaQ7SLfX4TjWx0u7w9GgAD0z5gKwFULzKKivw ClanIzcH99O2oRDh9kH2XSb0UEiqZsaGG/xD+76OPGrjdYQfM7uiY3jrO3G1EeD0Xmog LdMw== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YORpOyn8exXsgciWOAiaE9jooOx7mqFS3u0jbMu7Zl1U61uazC05LAHEkCw0OWtRxQ== X-Received: by 10.66.150.202 with SMTP id uk10mr41179626pab.73.1453889225888; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 02:07:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:44b8:31ae:7b01:6821:be33:19f8:f73a? (2001-44b8-31ae-7b01-6821-be33-19f8-f73a.static.ipv6.internode.on.net. [2001:44b8:31ae:7b01:6821:be33:19f8:f73a]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n8sm7777230pfj.46.2016.01.27.02.07.03 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 27 Jan 2016 02:07:05 -0800 (PST) Sender: Kubilay Kocak Reply-To: koobs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r407270 - head/ports-mgmt/portmaster References: <201601261123.u0QBNcvL091258@repo.freebsd.org> <56A86CAD.7030507@marino.st> <56A8747E.5080703@FreeBSD.org> <20160127081700.GA20812@FreeBSD.org> <56A87FCE.6080305@FreeBSD.org> <20160127084230.GA28230@FreeBSD.org> <56A88489.5020507@FreeBSD.org> <20160127093601.GA54242@FreeBSD.org> <56A893D9.8000504@FreeBSD.org> <20160127095927.GA64137@FreeBSD.org> To: Alexey Dokuchaev Cc: Martin Wilke , ports-committers@freebsd.org, "svn-ports-all@FreeBSD.org" , "svn-ports-head@FreeBSD.org" From: Kubilay Kocak Message-ID: <56A896C1.305@FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 21:06:57 +1100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:44.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/44.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160127095927.GA64137@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 10:07:07 -0000 On 27/01/2016 8:59 PM, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > OK, still does not imply that it will evicted, while EXPIRATION_DATE does. In other projects it does, in ours it implies it 'by definition', even if it doesn't mean it (in effect). That ambiguity (in effect) is *exactly* why I reckon ALERT/NOTICE/WARNING/FOO is better. > I prefer software that says forever (well, as long as the Ports Tree and > FreeBSD themselves). Unconditionally EOLing ports on their inception is > IMHO atrocious (in reply to adjacent email). Stating that there is an EOL date, and saying something is EOL *now*, are different. If we had the ability to distinguish between the two, there wouldn't be an issue. Right now we can't, or it doesn't make sense because our DEPRECATED/EXPIRES are loaded in the sense that they imply "NOW", which again is exactly what I was getting at.