From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 9 01:45:51 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 446241065670; Wed, 9 Nov 2011 01:45:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sobomax@sippysoft.com) Received: from mail.sippysoft.com (mail.sippysoft.com [4.59.13.245]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19A648FC15; Wed, 9 Nov 2011 01:45:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from s0106005004e13421.vs.shawcable.net ([70.71.175.212] helo=[192.168.1.79]) by mail.sippysoft.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.72 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1RNwjt-000LA9-Au; Tue, 08 Nov 2011 17:14:05 -0800 Message-ID: <4EB9D3D7.8000009@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 17:13:59 -0800 From: Maxim Sobolev Organization: Sippy Software, Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110929 Thunderbird/7.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Barton References: <201111072338.pA7NcnGG069162@repoman.freebsd.org> <4EB877EF.3080902@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4EB877EF.3080902@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: sobomax@sippysoft.com X-ssp-trusted: yes Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/net Makefile ports/net/asterisk14 Makefile distinfo pkg-descr pkg-plist ports/net/asterisk14/files asterisk.sh.in codecnego-patch-Makefile dtmf_debug.diff ilbc_enable.diff nocodecnego-patch-Makefile patch-Makefile.rules ... X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: **OBSOLETE** CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2011 01:45:51 -0000 On 11/7/2011 4:29 PM, Doug Barton wrote: > Given that we already have 1.6 and 1.8 in ports, what's the value of > having this much older version? > > I didn't hear one single request to spare it when I deprecated it many > months ago, and it's been completely gone for over 3 weeks now. Have > users been asking for it to be returned? There is a reason why Digium still makes security releases of that software. And we still have 1.0 and 1.2 in the tree, so why not 1.4? IMHO, 1.4 should stay at least until 1.0 and 1.2 get booted. I know at least few other companies that use 1.4 heavily and if you take just Sippy Software we have around 100 production installations that use 1.4 around the globe, so you have a very motivated maintainer. Yes, we can keep it in our private tree, but I am pretty sure there is somebody out there who can benefit from this as well. -Maxim