From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org  Fri Dec 16 16:09:02 2016
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
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 1E4BBC804AD
 for <freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Fri, 16 Dec 2016 16:09:02 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from marquis@roble.com)
Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F78DE6B
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Fri, 16 Dec 2016 16:09:02 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from marquis@roble.com)
Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix)
 id 0BF90C804AC; Fri, 16 Dec 2016 16:09:02 +0000 (UTC)
Delivered-To: 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 0BA09C804AB
 for <ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>; Fri, 16 Dec 2016 16:09:02 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from marquis@roble.com)
Received: from mx5.roble.com (mx5.roble.com [206.40.34.5])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client CN "mx5.roble.com", Issuer "mx5.roble.com" (not verified))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 01D07E6A;
 Fri, 16 Dec 2016 16:09:01 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from marquis@roble.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2016 08:09:01 -0800 (PST)
From: Roger Marquis <marquis@roble.com>
To: marino@freebsd.org
cc: "ports@FreeBSD.org Ports" <ports@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: The ports collection has some serious issues
In-Reply-To: <5c6df0ce-a473-d125-10a0-71b95a83512b@marino.st>
Message-ID: <1612160801490.3123@mx5.roble.com>
References: <5c6df0ce-a473-d125-10a0-71b95a83512b@marino.st>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2016 16:09:02 -0000

> It is just semantics.

That may be but as illustrated in this thread people maintain
unreasonable expectations of portmaster which they often blame on the
ports subsystem.

> I never understood why people went ape-**** over it, unless they don't
> understand what "deprecated without expiration" actually means.

Perhaps then this is the crux of the issue.  From my experience
"deprecated" means only that something will not appear in a future
version of the OS.  It implies nothing about the suitability of the
software itself.  "deprecated without expiration" is a contradiction.

> If Torsten drops maintainership then some sort of "strong" warning should 
> come with that drop.  I would be satisfied with adding a descriptive 
> DEPRECATED message myself.

TZ or no TZ we should drop the deprecation notice until it has an
expiration date and clarify the warning terms (ASAP).  At least that
way, when a thread like this comes up in the future, the only response
needed would be a pointer to the install message.

Roger