Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 10:07:55 +0200 From: John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st> To: Rusmir Dusko <nemysis@FreeBSD.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r352089 - head/print/detex Message-ID: <535A17DB.3070300@marino.st> In-Reply-To: <201404250715.s3P7FSaK088998@svn.freebsd.org> References: <201404250715.s3P7FSaK088998@svn.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 4/25/2014 09:15, Rusmir Dusko wrote: > Author: nemysis > Date: Fri Apr 25 07:15:28 2014 > New Revision: 352089 > URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/352089 > QAT: https://qat.redports.org/buildarchive/r352089/ > > Log: > - Bump PORTREVISION for LICENSE adding > - Remove DEPRECATED, EXPIRATION_DATE > - Add license (MIT) > - Support STAGEDIR > - Add post-extract to fix MAN > - Add DOCS and Option > - Please don't deprecate so easily next time, > this port was not hard to fix. What's the point of the last line of the commit message? Deprecation is not about how hard a port is to fix. It's obviously that a large number of ports were identified as by some characteristic and all deprecated without examining the ports in detail. You found this port. You added stage support. You removed the deprecation. That's what is supposed to happen. Had you done none of those things, the port would eventually be removed, which is fine -- it means nobody cared enough about it. By the way, you didn't address the stated reason it was deprecated: It has no maintainer and hasn't had one in 12 years. (still true) John
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?535A17DB.3070300>