From owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 29 10:49:39 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D525106566B; Wed, 29 Sep 2010 10:49:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ehaupt@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mx.critical.ch (cl-8.zrh-02.ch.sixxs.net [IPv6:2001:1620:f00:7::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB8138FC17; Wed, 29 Sep 2010 10:49:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wiggles.bwns.ch (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.critical.ch (8.14.3/8.14.3/critical-1.0) with SMTP id o8TAnbDj086916; Wed, 29 Sep 2010 12:49:37 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ehaupt@FreeBSD.org) Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 12:49:37 +0200 From: Emanuel Haupt To: Alexey Dokuchaev Message-Id: <20100929124937.f53c0764.ehaupt@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <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> <20100929081542.GA97597@FreeBSD.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.0.3 (GTK+ 2.20.1; amd64-portbld-freebsd8.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Erwin Lansing , cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/sysutils/screenie Makefile pkg-descr X-BeenThere: cvs-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the ports tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 10:49:39 -0000 Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > 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. Just a thought. How about setup a public database which tracks how long a port is unmaintained/unupdated. Review the ports which should have a maintainer since they are somewhat important. Automatically expire ports that didn't have a maintainer for let's say a year. Emanuel