Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 20:19:01 +0000 From: Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com> To: vwe@freebsd.org Cc: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>, freebsd-bugbusters@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Gnats port disappeared?? Message-ID: <CADLo83-u7eibmL9BcAwKA0XjxWnQYutJvXawmfSB-fRCrVuB1A@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4F11E1BA.2010404@freebsd.org> References: <CADLo83_QkSjJcQaWG6%2Bsc45crc4dWLg_jonLtN9p7OLrMJHUMA@mail.gmail.com> <4F11E1BA.2010404@freebsd.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On 14 January 2012 20:12, <vwe@freebsd.org> wrote: > Hi Chris! > On 01/14/12 17:41, Chris Rees wrote: >> >> Hey Mark, >> >> Got a bit of a shock: >> >> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/databases/gnats/Attic/Makefile >> >> Did you know about this? It's innocent and reasonable, but possibly a >> mistake. >> >> I was going to prepare a patch for GNATS so it didn't get confused by >> subjects like >> >> Fwd: Re: ports/152537: [patch] database/postgresql90-server no longer >> needs >> >> Would there be interest in such a patch? Would you like the port >> resurrected, or should I just let you use a local copy? > > > Latest databases/gnats Makefile had this for a while before removal of the > port: > > FORBIDDEN= Security issues > DEPRECATED= ${FORBIDDEN} > EXPIRATION_DATE= 2011-09-30 > > So it's clearly not a mistake, but a portsmgr decision. > > Also everything else has to be decided by portsmgr but a port with unfixed > security issues over a long period of time seems a good candidate to be > removed. Yes, thank you, I did review the change history ;) I saw that dougb had given the port an expiry as part of a large commit, and miwi had removed it as part of another large commit. Innocent actions, but the history indicated it was swept away as collateral, rather than portmgr approved. Chrishome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADLo83-u7eibmL9BcAwKA0XjxWnQYutJvXawmfSB-fRCrVuB1A>