Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 13:40:45 -0600 (CST) From: Ted Hatfield <ted@io-tx.com> To: Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Eugene Grosbein <eugen@grosbein.net>, Sunpoet Po-Chuan Hsieh <sunpoet@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Procmail got updated! Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.20.1712191321070.18473@io-tx.com> In-Reply-To: <f68594db-396b-0821-e90d-3f089781e8fd@gmx.de> References: <alpine.BSF.2.21.1712181012470.92288@aneurin.horsfall.org> <a3a1097d-22c7-89cc-dd69-b4ceeebf7228@gmx.de> <alpine.BSF.2.20.1712181824220.10261@io-tx.com> <f68594db-396b-0821-e90d-3f089781e8fd@gmx.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 19 Dec 2017, Matthias Andree wrote: > Am 19.12.2017 um 01:30 schrieb Ted Hatfield: >> >> >> On Mon, 18 Dec 2017, Matthias Andree wrote: >> >>> Am 18.12.2017 um 00:17 schrieb Dave Horsfall: >>>> Doing my regular update, and... >>>> >>>> Upgrading procmail from 3.22_9 to 3.22_10... >>>> >>>> Good grief; who's the masochist who volunteered to support this >>>> obscure insecure and hitherto-unsupported scripting language? >>>> >>> https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=revision&revision=455800 >>> >>> I'd agree we should pull the plug on the package. We'll be in for the >>> usual "but it works for me" screaming of the irresponsible people who >>> don't care (and most of them won't know that they need to write the >>> exception/error handling themselves in their .procmailrc recipes). >>> >>> Sunpoet, can we mark the port as deprecated given that even the upstream >>> once said it should best be abolished? I can't find the reference now, >>> the procmail.org website displays "Site hosting in transit, information >>> will be back up shortly." >>> >> >> Dear Matthias, >> >> As one of the "irresponsible" people who is still using procmail on >> our systems and has built an number of scripts and customer >> infrastructure around it I take exception to the term irresponsible. >> Perhaps the better word is overworked. If I had the time to move to >> dovecot/sieve or maildrop as a local delivery agent I would have done >> so by now. >> >> Ted Hatfield > > Dear Ted, Eugene, > > I think if the procmail language were a bit more "regular", someone > would have written converter scripts long ago by now. > > Other than that, I find it hard to believe that people don't have time > for over x in [3; 17] years to migrate, which in many cases would in my > book be more a situation of "I don't want to..." rather than "I am > unable to...". I don't mean to judge your situation, just that to me it > looks a matter that you have not yet found it important enough to bother. > > Given that the former maintainer asked OpenBSD to pull the plug on the > port already 37 months ago (see here > <https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports&m=141634350915839&w=2>) after > findings from fuzzing, and now to see security updates to a defunct > upstream port, I don't think we should keep the port around for much > longer. The expiration I was proposing isn't "axe it out now", we would > not normally do that, and it's at the maintainer's (i. e. sunpoet@'s) > discretion what expiration date, if any, will be set. > > But the question if we as downstream packagers/providers want to step in > for a package abolished by the upstream almost a generation ago, is one > that needs serious consideration. I wouldn't endorse that the project > waste time on decrepit ports for which decent alternatives exist. > > > Best, > Matthias > Matthias, My response wasn't meant to disprove your argument. There is a valid case behind dropping support for procmail and you are welcome to make that argument. >From my point of view (and I bet quite a few others) I've been using a software product provided by the port maintainers for quite a long time. During that time I've kept my software up to date and patched. As far as I am concerned I've done my due dilligence. If you want to make an argument against maintaining procmail I completely understand that. I just don't think that denigrating others while making your argument is the way to go about it. Ted Hatfield
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.20.1712191321070.18473>