From owner-svn-ports-head@FreeBSD.ORG Sat May 18 07:02:36 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74B50EA2; Sat, 18 May 2013 07:02:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from draco@marino.st) Received: from shepard.synsport.net (mail.synsport.com [208.69.230.148]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D41C340; Sat, 18 May 2013 07:02:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.21] (unknown [130.255.16.8]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shepard.synsport.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAEEA43C3B; Sat, 18 May 2013 02:02:21 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <51972775.4040304@marino.st> Date: Sat, 18 May 2013 09:02:13 +0200 From: John Marino User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0) Gecko/20120129 Thunderbird/10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jason Helfman Subject: Re: svn commit: r318406 - head/editors/xxe References: <201305172145.r4HLjxc1036520@svn.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "svn-ports-head@freebsd.org" , "svn-ports-all@freebsd.org" , Erwin Lansing , "ports-committers@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 18 May 2013 07:02:36 -0000 On 5/18/2013 01:58, Jason Helfman wrote: > I've updated this to 5.6.0. > > It looks like "fetching distfiles" being broken would be expected, as > these are evaluation versions that are good only for 30 days. > > Archived versions aren't available for this reason. Chances are if it is > broken by a missing distribution file, then in theory it could be > updated with a new evaluation version. Wait, let me get this straight: A port that has no maintainer requires maintenance ever 30 days? That's an unreasonable burden on ports@ Based on this alone, if a person with a commit bit isn't willing to take over this port, it should be removed. Secondly, is this the type of evaluation version that you can only use for 30 days and then it stops working? In any cases, there is nothing about "30 days" mentioned in the pkg-descr file and this is likely highly pertinent information. So the pkg-descr should be updated. Thirdly, from a philosophical point of view, I don't feel that 30-day limited software has a place in ports (I also feel the same way about demo software, the most ridiculous current example being the editors/softmaker-office demo from 2006). It could be that I've misunderstood the implications of the "good for 30 days" part though.