Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2021 12:19:20 -0700 From: "Dan Mahoney (Ports)" <freebsd@gushi.org> To: Chris <portmaster@bsdforge.com> Cc: RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com>, ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Python 2.7 removal outline Message-ID: <14A27037-4174-4708-9AE3-16D599076639@gushi.org> In-Reply-To: <8552dddf3bc33e42ae124cd4ea53fb4f@bsdforge.com> References: <20210324130347.GA29020@freefall.freebsd.org> <10693816.1udYB6hd2u@ravel> <20210325150320.f74kx2uor4dwl5y5@aniel.nours.eu> <feba494f-b1ea-5bbe-0457-1c85ab08041a@quip.cz> <3c1821a8-0afb-f27c-05d4-6ad0cf577f2a@m5p.com> <alpine.BSF.2.21.9999.2103261347370.85788@aneurin.horsfall.org> <20210326154426.7c7079f2@gumby.homeunix.com> <8552dddf3bc33e42ae124cd4ea53fb4f@bsdforge.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
More thoughts on mailman, specifically: So, I just went to find an old FB post I made about mailman 2.x: =3D=3D=3D =46rom the "Load Bearing B****it" department: Pretty much the entire world is stuck using an EOL'd mailing list = manager (mailman 2.x), which depends on an EOL'd python (2.7). =20 This includes: * All the gnu mailing lists * All of the linux mailing lists at listman.redhat * all the FreeBSD mailing lists * all the sourceforge mailing lists * all the IETF mailing lists * all of lists.isc.org * NANOG =3D=3D=3D That=E2=80=99s an AWFUL LOT of sysadmins, network admins, and coders who = looked long and hard at Mailman 3 and decided =E2=80=9Cthat=E2=80=99s = not ready yet=E2=80=9D. I think, if *nothing else*, tauthon needs to be stapled in for mailman, = even if it lives under /usr/local/mailman/bin or something (and bakes in = the couple of dependencies). I know about the archive incompatibility. There *might* be a GSOC = project to fix it. Maybe. Other changes can happen with greater use, = but clearly there=E2=80=99s a first-mover disadvantage here. -Dan > On Mar 26, 2021, at 9:06 AM, Chris <portmaster@bsdforge.com> wrote: >=20 > On 2021-03-26 08:44, RW via freebsd-ports wrote: >> On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 13:55:33 +1100 (EST) >> Dave Horsfall wrote: >>> On Thu, 25 Mar 2021, George Mitchell wrote: >>> >> [...] it is really not for everybody to use overlays in current >>> >> state (overlays are poor documented at least). [...] >>> > >>> > Until this thread I had never heard of them. -- >>> > George >>> I can't remember the last time I used overlays (certainly with = CP/M); >>> I didn't know that FreeBSD even supported them (why bother when >>> you've got VM?). >> I doubt that meaning of overlay is going to be relevant. I'd not = heard >> of it either, but from looking in ports/Mk/ it seems to be a way of >> modifying port builds. > As I understand it. It allows you to graft out-of-tree ports/versions > onto the ports-tree-proper. >=20 > --Chris >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list >> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to = "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to = "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?14A27037-4174-4708-9AE3-16D599076639>