From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 12 08:42:47 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54FDA1065673 for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 08:42:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tomse@tomse.dk) Received: from pasmtpA.tele.dk (pasmtpa.tele.dk [80.160.77.114]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 116E98FC23 for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 08:42:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.5.95] (unknown [62.243.124.37]) by pasmtpA.tele.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EA8E8003E5 for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 10:25:18 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4E6DC1ED.2070105@tomse.dk> Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 10:25:17 +0200 From: Carsten Jensen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.21) Gecko/20110831 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.13 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: <4E6B1AF5.7090900@tomse.dk> <4E6B227B.5050708@FreeBSD.org> <4E6B77EE.6030509@gmx.de> <20110910171530.GC23457@guilt.hydra> <20110910190549.GA23971@guilt.hydra> <20110911124910.GK13219@portland.byshenk.net> <4E6D42BC.3070400@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4E6D42BC.3070400@FreeBSD.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Removed ports - looking from the bench 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: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 08:42:47 -0000 On 2011-09-12 01:22, Doug Barton wrote: > On 09/11/2011 13:35, Warren Block wrote: >> Let me suggest a reasonable[1] plan: > > No. :) No more talking is necessary. Doing is necessary (or not, > doesn't really matter to me at this point). > > I think Chris is right, a reasonable first step is a Handbook section on > "How to recover a port from the CVS Attic." Beyond that if users want to > get together and implement Carsten's idea, or another similar service, > go for it! > > But at this point there is no more utility in continuing to talk about > this topic. Everyone has said what they have to say, often numerous > times, and there has been way more heat than light shed on the topic for > some time now (as evidenced by Conrad's recent post where he realized > that the issue is not nearly as dire as he thought it was after taking a > look at what is actually happening). > > > Time to move on, > > Doug > I think what needed to be discussed has been said, I wasn't aware that the old ports was stored in CVS. With this option, I too think it's enough to write it in the handbook. Thank you all cheers Carsten