From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Sep 29 08:15:42 2010
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033)
	id 34A5A106566C; Wed, 29 Sep 2010 08:15:42 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 08:15:42 +0000
From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To: Erwin Lansing <erwin@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <20100929081542.GA97597@FreeBSD.org>
References: <201009272151.o8RLpA8I002279@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<20100928024255.GA61304@FreeBSD.org>
	<20100928075649.c3bcb0a9.ehaupt@FreeBSD.org>
	<20100928122336.GB32589@FreeBSD.org> <4CA269E6.4030005@FreeBSD.org>
	<20100929070005.GU77643@droso.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20100929070005.GU77643@droso.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/sysutils/screenie Makefile pkg-descr
X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: **OBSOLETE** CVS commit messages for the entire tree
	<cvs-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 08:15:42 -0000

On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 09:00:06AM +0200, Erwin Lansing wrote:
> This case is actually actively taken care of, although of course some
> cases will fall through the cracks.  Portmgr does occassionally run a
> full build of all ports on the pointyhat cluster with local caching
> turned off, forcing all ports to be fetch from the configured
> MASTER_SITES.  In fact, I started one just yesterday.  Maintainers will
> be informed and unmaintained ports will be marked BROKEN, and lateron
> scheduled for deletion.  But like you said, there will still be cases
> that will fall through and we do need to get better at removing stale
> ports.

I think people would also appreciate more clear criteria on when to mark
port as deprecated.  For now the only one I know is "being broken and
unmaintained for 6-12 months".  Availability of distfile and master site
does not seem enough.  Unpatched security issue, on contrary, could
encourage deprecation with shorter expiration period.

./danfe