Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 06:05:44 +0000 From: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org> To: Lang Hai <freealson@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 2nd deprecation campaign Message-ID: <BANLkTimZodEVONJP6tsDtBgSOpyXj_ov=Q@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <6F24ECDD-78FB-473D-A249-B76A3615D0AF@gmail.com> References: <BANLkTimHB8USHJLG8Jtb4Nwu7O7O3q4u%2BA@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTi=Jh-P9jBxbkmSnjB1PX_nWE27Upw@mail.gmail.com> <6F24ECDD-78FB-473D-A249-B76A3615D0AF@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> The depreciation is only for those ports that don't have public available distfiles right? So that I agree that broken ports should be excluded from this depreciation. That is the way it is done, anyway there still could be some false positive having people to doulble check is always good :) >> > So yes, always give people chance to fix ports, not remove them from the tree. > > And, do we have a list of all maintainer-wanted ports, because that would be great if we have. Here you are :) http://www.freshports.org/search.php?stype=maintainer&method=exact&query=ports@FreeBSD.org > Regards, > Hai Lang regards, Bapt
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BANLkTimZodEVONJP6tsDtBgSOpyXj_ov=Q>