From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Fri Sep 30 07:19:19 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20ABCC03E0C for ; Fri, 30 Sep 2016 07:19:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mailinglists@toco-domains.de) Received: from toco-domains.de (mail.toco-domains.de [IPv6:2a01:4f8:150:50a5::6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF6DF1D5F; Fri, 30 Sep 2016 07:19:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mailinglists@toco-domains.de) Received: from [0.0.0.0] (mail.toco-domains.de [IPv6:2a01:4f8:150:50a5::6]) by toco-domains.de (Postfix) with ESMTPA id EBA8D1AAF046; Fri, 30 Sep 2016 09:19:15 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: Google Code as an upstream is gone To: Kurt Jaeger , Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> References: <2047d7fd-1849-6008-5be1-5fb3d1aa0661@FreeBSD.org> <3e59578a-8556-111a-f3d4-0e641a50043e@FreeBSD.org> <20160929165700.GA33046@lorvorc.mips.inka.de> <57ED667A.8080509@quip.cz> <20160929191041.GC85563@home.opsec.eu> Cc: Mathieu Arnold , Christian Weisgerber , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org From: Torsten Zuehlsdorff Message-ID: <127d55a5-6dba-ab00-9956-4ba0efc534ef@toco-domains.de> Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 09:19:15 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160929191041.GC85563@home.opsec.eu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 07:19:19 -0000 On 29.09.2016 21:10, Kurt Jaeger wrote: > Hi! > >> Christian Weisgerber wrote on 09/29/2016 18:57: >>> Mathieu Arnold: >>> >>>> If the software has not been moved to some other place, (it takes about >>>> 30 seconds to click the automatic migration to github thing, and it is >>>> usually done within the hour,) since march 2015, it is most likely >>>> abandoned and should not be kept in the ports tree. >>> >>> That's a bold new policy. >>> >>> In the past, if the upstream was gone and the maintainer judged the >>> software still useful (at their discretion, not based on a cut-off >>> date), they would even fall back to providing the distfile at >>> people.freebsd.org. >> >> I don't think it is good to remove ports just because source was not >> updated for some time. There are ports useful even 10 years after last >> update. Namely pnm2ppa is really old piece of code. It was removed from >> ports tree because there was not maintainer. So I must become a >> maintainer and now the port is alive again. >> I think there should not be policy to remove ports if they have >> maintainer or some user using them if only thing which should be done is >> to change SRC url. > > I agree, old code does not mean it's useless code. Yes. Like i already said: there is a great bunch of software were the developer is even dead and the software is still useful. The software is feature complete and just runs. > We probably need a way to find out how often a pkg is downloaded > from a repo to understand which ports/pkg are really used in our > user base. This helps to decide if a port is really no longer in use. That would be very misleading. Some people always compile (like myself for example). And if the software is old it is very likely that you install them ones. And another time when you need a new server because your hardware died. Greetings, Torsten