From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org  Fri Dec 16 16:39:32 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 B1790C80B7A
 for <freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Fri, 16 Dec 2016 16:39:32 +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 A18C81D8E
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Fri, 16 Dec 2016 16:39:32 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from marquis@roble.com)
Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix)
 id 9E254C80B79; Fri, 16 Dec 2016 16:39:32 +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 9C241C80B77
 for <ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>; Fri, 16 Dec 2016 16:39:32 +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 865141D8D;
 Fri, 16 Dec 2016 16:39:32 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from marquis@roble.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2016 08:39:31 -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: <a0c196df-0663-1de1-4cc6-7a4ecf207246@marino.st>
Message-ID: <1612160831390.3123@mx5.roble.com>
References: <5c6df0ce-a473-d125-10a0-71b95a83512b@marino.st>
 <1612160801490.3123@mx5.roble.com>
 <a0c196df-0663-1de1-4cc6-7a4ecf207246@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 16:39:32 -0000

John Marino wrote:
> From porters handbook, section 12.15:
> "It is possible to set DEPRECATED without an EXPIRATION_DATE (for instance, 
> recommending a newer version of the port)

I'd consider that to be a bug.

> So it's not a contradiction.  Ports that have a specific removal date must 
> have EXPIRATION_DATE set.  If you say, well DEPRECATION implies removal, I'd 
> agree, but it's at an indefinite time and I'd say that time would come when 
> portmaster no longer works on the current ports tree. When that happens (and 
> it probably will happen) then EXPIRATION can be set.

Non-standard uses of the term "deprecated" are problematic from a
usability perspective.  Since there is currently no deprecation messages
(apologies for the misunderstanding, I haven't used portmaster) at least
(TZ) add an install-time WARNING so we can avoid misleading potential
portmaster users (and related mailing lists threads/topics).

IMO,
Roger