From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 30 18:24:48 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EF37106564A; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 18:24:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cvs-src@yandex.ru) Received: from forward10.mail.yandex.net (forward10.mail.yandex.net [IPv6:2a02:6b8:0:202::5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE3D28FC0C; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 18:24:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp9.mail.yandex.net (smtp9.mail.yandex.net [77.88.61.35]) by forward10.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id 10BCC10224E5; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 22:24:46 +0400 (MSD) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.ru; s=mail; t=1317407086; bh=Y0/K1ueK2FKrj46Vk1x5Q+xq6HtrHhv5EqvzSjgRRQs=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=bJHQw7Qi3nCtL5S/ODfkeEMtTmnz0ODdNwCPQ8CULxbXoEStI8zdSR5+nX6KXiN63 Ply2cbvYf5d6c/QZBeOEbVuPrQeGdezFETKGeT+9ueSbbT/TjJpEcFOq31zI71C0fy 1UKvIKp3haejRm7brNorOiJtJBpPwdkV3ZTb0/qk= Received: from smtp9.mail.yandex.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp9.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id DAB431520433; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 22:24:45 +0400 (MSD) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.ru; s=mail; t=1317407085; bh=Y0/K1ueK2FKrj46Vk1x5Q+xq6HtrHhv5EqvzSjgRRQs=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=npJ7DSfcHGN1qCOxT7b/5WSkSgu0uayLmET3tLkB45JO9mOmWVnKa8l1/HFGTxerN zwmstuJoh1dbomBbTqYEMb4/M3QMMyFaNAcjBaYvIM0A/9AFN18TkIlhBOKFvakMCg Nu3+mAHKXodrCInIP4ScG/hi0i9GqeBJeKYBrqco= Received: from unknown (unknown [213.138.88.133]) by smtp9.mail.yandex.net (nwsmtp/Yandex) with ESMTP id OjuaXBu2-OjumZGo8; Fri, 30 Sep 2011 22:24:45 +0400 X-Yandex-Spam: 1 Message-ID: <4E8604F4.6010304@yandex.ru> Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 22:05:40 +0400 From: Ruslan Mahmatkhanov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD i386; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110916 Thunderbird/6.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Barton References: <4E858E86.4010402@yandex.ru> <4E8590CD.8050005@FreeBSD.org> <4E8591E5.6010005@yandex.ru> <4E8604C4.5070804@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4E8604C4.5070804@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: FreeBSD Ports Mailing List , Julien Laffaye Subject: Re: recent ports removal X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 18:24:48 -0000 Doug Barton wrote on 30.09.2011 22:04: > On 09/30/2011 02:54, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote: >> Doug Barton wrote on 30.09.2011 13:50: >>> On 09/30/2011 02:40, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote: >>>> Hi, Doug. >>>> >>>> You just removed www/pyblosxom. But we have a pr, that update it to >>>> latest (not-vulnerable) version: http://bugs.freebsd.org/160682. >>> >>> Julien took that PR, when he's ready to do the update he can pull the >>> files out of the Attic. >>> >>> >>> Doug >> >> Ok, but as far i recall, there in ports@ was sounded a policy like "we >> do not remove the ports with open pr's on them". > > I think you misunderstand what "remove" means in this context. :) Or > perhaps you've never worked with a version control system ... It's [just for thrulz] Yes, it's my second day around the computer system. [/just for thrulz] > honestly hard for me to understand why it's hard for people to > understand this concept. When Julien is ready to do his work all he has > to do is type 'cvs co -D 2011-09-29 ports/www/pyblosxom > ports/www/Makefile' and then do his thing. Because a port has been > "removed" today is completely irrelevant to the possibility that it will > come back in a non-vulnerable form tomorrow. I understand that it can be restored in one click, but what the point to remove it in first place if it known that someone already working on it and will undelete it in near time? As far i understand it makes commiter's life little a bit harder and most important - it confuses the users, who actually using this ports. Ok, actually i'm asking all this questions in first place because your action on pyblosxom did not conform with this sentence by bapt@: """ > How can ports be removed if the solutions for them is in gnats? > They won't before deleting ports, we always check gnats, if a PR exists then we leave the ports so that the PR can be committed """ http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2011-September/069998.html So i'm just curious what is the agreed policy about such ports? Please don't get me wrong. [...] > > > hth, > > Doug > -- Regards, Ruslan Tinderboxing kills... the drives.