Zik
	5KilInGyoLXqxpdj7eTxV8aRsv189mXA/CnCTSy0AdHiyI5/p1CE2yf6JxunlcsZOCA/wu
	CtfQKG5i7ZpNB0fk2kCCIfWicj5zYknXq6Pefh5naj0Cvg7cux/wanVzQrDlZw==
Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d])
	(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
	 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256)
	(Client did not present a certificate)
	by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4WHhQV3NR3zpvv
	for <ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org>; Mon,  8 Jul 2024 11:16:34 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org)
Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5])
	by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 468BGYZX093064
	for <ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org>; Mon, 8 Jul 2024 11:16:34 GMT
	(envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org)
Received: (from www@localhost)
	by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 468BGYsp093059
	for ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 8 Jul 2024 11:16:34 GMT
	(envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f
From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To: ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject: [Bug 280189] sysutils/beadm-devel - beadm(1) possible deprecation?
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2024 11:16:34 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: Ports & Packages
X-Bugzilla-Component: Individual Port(s)
X-Bugzilla-Version: Latest
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People
X-Bugzilla-Who: erichanskrs@gmail.com
X-Bugzilla-Status: New
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: ---
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
X-Bugzilla-Flags: maintainer-feedback?
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-280189-7788-pcA7wswo8b@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-280189-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-280189-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
List-Id: Ports bug reports <freebsd-ports-bugs.freebsd.org>
List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-ports-bugs
List-Help: <mailto:ports-bugs+help@freebsd.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ports-bugs@freebsd.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:ports-bugs+subscribe@freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ports-bugs+unsubscribe@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org
Sender: owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
MIME-Version: 1.0

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D280189

Eric <erichanskrs@gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |portmgr@FreeBSD.org

--- Comment #2 from Eric <erichanskrs@gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Slawomir Wojciech Wojtczak from comment #1)

Thanks for replying.

Based on
https://www.freebsd.org/portmgr/
https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/porters-handbook/book/

my guess is that a port committer has to "commit" the deprecation and final
removal from the ports tree, if that is the action that will taken.

Probably, portmgr (Ports Management Team) will take the lead in the core=20
decision.

I've taken the liberty in adding portmgr to the CC list.


P.S.
Searching
https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/porters-handbook/book/
I could not find any specific reference for this kind of deprecation reques=
t.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=