From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 7 20:49:58 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34F61F26 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 20:49:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amvandemore@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qc0-f171.google.com (mail-qc0-f171.google.com [209.85.216.171]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D20276E3 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 20:49:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qc0-f171.google.com with SMTP id d1so12945581qca.2 for ; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 12:49:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=66ZPlFsoQCrrSI1MHU2qBCSNJnnwSq1R5aPGxqgNrdE=; b=EkgIwYcxfiq6fMZgM4snhNEqxbVfOWqSBQPYadMGt7OoA3cUFFA3xbx0kXN2CXc20K e80CRWINZ6E+5B/YxbOpmodrF62Ou1M7JMHtsiipAFl9gZiNnXJdFZSaXUerD3n39ihT Pu3RgSunmo7SStnSkoPVdi0AVQFFcjzkaYApZIW2dkc8+5wQB8b+V7YXYZIf67fUDCUi 685jdYpVCLL15oA9eZKmVQLh3rqh1P+oqKJ0yPVEh/P/B9EzthH5pT5PY6JYXzX0GVHR Zy88qJYF5+zNcwTatduuE0TKnrpXN2HpgA71kb8WHW1Xn1R3k9jWDhoPTL7oTyDBF5Ni UCAA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.216.8 with SMTP id hg8mr977099qab.74.1357591791686; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 12:49:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.49.128.168 with HTTP; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 12:49:51 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <50EB1991.8010400@marino.st> References: <50EADA33.9010308@aldan.algebra.com> <50EB16B2.4070502@FreeBSD.org> <50EB1991.8010400@marino.st> Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 14:49:51 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Why delete KDE3 ports? From: Adam Vande More To: John Marino Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 20:49:58 -0000 On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 12:53 PM, John Marino wrote: > > Here's the issue I think some folks have: > > "Outdated": debatable. If outdated means a newer release is available, > then yes. If "outdated" means it outlived its usefulness, I'd say no. This > term seems subjectively used here. > > "prone to break": Perhaps, but it's not broken now. > > "possibly insecure": I think this needs to be "known insecure" rather > than holding it's last release date against it. http://www.kde.org/info/security/advisory-20100413-1.txt Probably other security issues as well. I didn't have to look very long. In a codebase as large as KDE's, it seems a very slim chance indeed years could go by without maintenance and still maintain security. -- Adam Vande More