Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 21:15:57 -0700 From: Paul Traina <pst@shockwave.com> To: asami@freebsd.org (Satoshi Asami) Cc: julian@whistle.com, CVS-committers@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-all@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-ports@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/net/tclDP Makefile ports/net/tclDP/files md5 ports/net/tclDP/patches patch-aa patch-ab patch-ac ports/net/tclDP/pkg COMMENT DESCR PLIST Message-ID: <199610100415.VAA07782@precipice.shockwave.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 09 Oct 1996 14:24:47 PDT." <199610092124.OAA16512@sunrise.cs.berkeley.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Satoshi, the port isn't broken, it's UNNEEDED. I added the port because Zircon needed it back 20 years ago when tcl didn't have native networking. I checked to insure that no other port came to depend upon tclDP in the mean time, and then removed it. It's obsolete, it's not being maintained, and irrelevant. If someone WANTS the port, then another committer can easily take responsibility for it and unarchive it with a 3 second set of cvs commands, or they can refer to one of the port archives from previous releases. There are still folks out there who LIKE tcl 7.3 / tk 3.6, and I fully intend to yank the rug out from under them the microsecond we remove all of the dependancies on them from ports. You certainly didn't object to that when I voiced my intention. I'll back off the venom a bit because you're right, I didn't tell anyone before-hand that I was going to nuke the port. I didn't think that was necessary given the circumstances. Next time, I'll say something first, if that meets your qualifications for being responsible. Paul From: asami@freebsd.org (Satoshi Asami) Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/net/tclDP Makefile ports/net/tclDP/files md5 p >>orts/net/tclDP/patches patch-aa patch-ab patch-ac ports/net/tclDP/pkg COMMENT >> DESCR PLIST * Sorry. I've spoken with the authors and they're beta-testing a version th >>at * runs under 4.1, I suggest that if you want it, you ping them and bring bac >>k * a new port, or just do it locally. * * Remember, not every piece of software that runs on your computer need be a >>n * freebsd port. :-) That's true, but it's very un-nice to yank carpets out from below people's feet. In the future, I suggest you just mark them BROKEN, or at least ask on the lists first before you remove a port. Just because someone did the original port doesn't give that person rights to unilaterally remove a port. (You aren't even the MAINTAINER of this port!) Satoshi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199610100415.VAA07782>