From nobody Sat Mar 30 19:53:58 2024 X-Original-To: dev-commits-ports-all@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4V6Sdk1LtNz5FrdP for ; Sat, 30 Mar 2024 19:54:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from daniel.engberg.lists@pyret.net) Received: from smtp-bc0c.mail.infomaniak.ch (smtp-bc0c.mail.infomaniak.ch [45.157.188.12]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "relay.mail.infomaniak.ch", Issuer "R3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4V6Sdh4DRcz4h2d; Sat, 30 Mar 2024 19:54:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from daniel.engberg.lists@pyret.net) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=pyret.net header.s=20231006 header.b=VgxqqTZR; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=pyret.net; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of daniel.engberg.lists@pyret.net designates 45.157.188.12 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=daniel.engberg.lists@pyret.net Received: from smtp-3-0000.mail.infomaniak.ch (smtp-3-0000.mail.infomaniak.ch [10.4.36.107]) by smtp-3-3000.mail.infomaniak.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4V6Sdf3Sb1zWBT; Sat, 30 Mar 2024 20:53:58 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=pyret.net; s=20231006; t=1711828438; bh=byrw20K/bEJxYwiPOQkHHYBYb/20KVzflUaRdMFeZkc=; h=Date:Subject:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=VgxqqTZR0M9ZrLqeCDHt8CK03q9ZtwMmpBrFZ7zBJMWjEmvsM0xrdzjHKJNjw1ymV 90RzgbIiJk+sXJXFpidaGucl53w95f6ZQeYU6fMYhDqOrDDWcmIBP1AAxh6igRhnCt 5/Cb9JJHl5AhZHCuR51qqn2SGkCm0QZj1TaoF1WYAYhiuziZl5Yv4JjR+MecjODsAs irWIn5jYFZOEFobzYaU+aZyUV2vkilmNAumdTHB0u+ldsEtaTzpPQ4raUW7p5hdOET Yn80y2yqOnUCjMIBSBaHhgpT9/pXOCXcCsy4tUy4KDielyZw5fEjAtxyGjdLKJw33w zqL86F9oOtYgQ== Received: from unknown by smtp-3-0000.mail.infomaniak.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4V6Sdf0G9Qz3X; Sat, 30 Mar 2024 20:53:58 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2024 20:53:58 +0100 Subject: Re: git: 020281bef16d - main - archivers/fastjar: remove undue deprecation of maintained port From: Daniel Engberg Reply-To: Daniel Engberg To: Fernando =?utf-8?Q?Apestegu=C3=ADa?= Cc: Gleb Popov , Alexey Dokuchaev , "ports-committers@FreeBSD.org" , dev-commits-ports-all@freebsd.org, dev-commits-ports-main@freebsd.org List-Id: Commit messages for all branches of the ports repository List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/dev-commits-ports-all List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-dev-commits-ports-all@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: dev-commits-ports-all@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-WS-User-Origin: eyJpdiI6IitTdTZwTytzQW1rcTl6MXpOMlVKY3c9PSIsInZhbHVlIjoiTWZTQXpjd1VWN0JSL0YxWXZtNVU2UT09IiwibWFjIjoiNjA0YWEyMzRlOTQ0NTczMDAxNmI3YjlhODg4NzIwMzM5YTU1Nzc4NGY2NWEyYmUzN2FmMjgwZThiYjMxMzg1MiIsInRhZyI6IiJ9 X-WS-User-Mbox: eyJpdiI6IlhOU2RRbTh4YmlqZE1DajVOdGxIVkE9PSIsInZhbHVlIjoiN2hJeEoyT0tTK2FucmhtQ3dUeUt2QT09IiwibWFjIjoiZjRhMGYzYTNmN2FjYWFhMjYxODdhMzI2ZGE1YzRiMjczNWE5YTk4ZjgzYzUwOGYxNmYwODEyZTNlNmNkYmQ1YSIsInRhZyI6IiJ9 X-WS-Location: eJxzKUpMKykGAAfpAmU- X-Mailer: Infomaniak Workspace (1.3.662) References: <202403300538.42U5c9Fc039162@gitrepo.freebsd.org> <03cc3443b1bbb8ec3ff881e73483b2cb@mail.infomaniak.com> In-Reply-To: X-Infomaniak-Routing: alpha X-Spamd-Bar: --- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-0.996]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[pyret.net,reject]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:45.157.188.8/29]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[pyret.net:s=20231006]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[pyret.net:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:29222, ipnet:45.157.188.0/22, country:CH]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; TO_DN_EQ_ADDR_SOME(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; TAGGED_RCPT(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[gmail.com]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[dev-commits-ports-all@freebsd.org]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.00)[daniel.engberg.lists@pyret.net]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[6]; REPLYTO_EQ_FROM(0.00)[] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4V6Sdh4DRcz4h2d On 2024-03-30T17:00:08.000+01:00, Fernando Apestegu=C3=ADa wrote: > El s=C3=A1b, 30 mar 2024, 14:21, Daniel Engberg > escribi=C3=B3: >=20 >=20 > > On 2024-03-30T09:06:51.000+01:00, Gleb Popov wr= ote: > >=20 > > > On Sat, Mar 30, 2024 at 8:38 AM Alexey Dokuchaev > > wrote: > >=20 > > > =20 > > >=20 > > > > =20 > > > > The branch main has been updated by danfe: > > > > =20 > > > > URL: > > > https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/ports/commit/?id=3D020281bef16d866a64bac35= 850f21ae27f956b5c > > >=20 > > > > =20 > > > > > =20 > > > > > commit 020281bef16d866a64bac35850f21ae27f956b5c > > > > > Author: Alexey Dokuchaev > > > > > AuthorDate: 2024-03-30 05:36:18 +0000 > > > > > Commit: Alexey Dokuchaev > > > > > CommitDate: 2024-03-30 05:36:18 +0000 > > > > > =20 > > > > > archivers/fastjar: remove undue deprecation of maintained= port > > > > =20 > > > > It is my personal opinion, but I think that one should assume > > > > maintainership when undeprecating a port (especially maintained b= y a > > > group) > > >=20 > > > I also found an old CVE which I don't know if it's fixed or not. > > > https://www.opencve.io/cve/CVE-2006-3619 > > =20 > >=20 > > If you don't know, then it is not an argument to keep the port deprecat= ed. > > If you are, then it might be. Even in that case, as per the handbook, p= orts > > with security issues are marked as FORBIDDEN, not DEPRECATED: Did I state anywhere that as a reason for deprecation? > >=20 > > https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/porters-handbook/book/#security-fix > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > > > =20 > > > There's also a fork here from what I can tell: > > > http://download.savannah.nongnu.org/releases/fastjar/ > > >=20 > > > I don't know if it's worth keeping for less than a sec of processing= and > > > newer version of openjdk might have improved performance too (openjd= k8 is > > > pretty old). > > >=20 > > =20 > > *might*? I think arguments for or against deprecating should not be gue= sses. Please clarify your reference > >=20 > > Don't get me wrong, I'm all for keeping the ports tree clean, but these= "a > > posteriori" (non) arguments sound a bit weak :-) I have no idea what you read. > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > > > Best regards, > > > Daniel > >=20 Best regards, Daniel