cvs commit: ports/audio/musicbox Makefile ports/misc/peq Makefile ports/games/pp Makefile ports/x11-toolkits/qt145 Makefile

[Tilman Linneweh]

* Alexey Dokuchaev [Tuesday, 27. September 2005 17:44 ]:
> >   Mark qt1 (QT4 is already released) and all ports depending on it as
> >   DEPRECATED and set an EXPIRATION_DATE.
>
> But is there anything wrong with these ports?  I see no reason to
> abandon things just because they use some old, but stable toolkit with
> no security issues (presumably).

Did you verify that there are no security issues?
There have been security advisories for QT
(a quick google search turns up CAN-2004-0691 - CAN-2004-0693).

What else justifies starting the Expiration period: 
* qt2 hit the ports tree in 1999 (more than 6 years ago), qt1 is not old, it 
is stoneold. If somebody cared about the remaining apps, he would have 
started porting them to qt3 in the last 6 years.
* qt1 does not compile with gcc3.x
( We are just entering the age of gcc4.x). Today nobody wants to develop C++ 
applications with gcc 2.x. If someone was interested in this port he would 
have merged the patches to make qt1 compile with gcc3 from pkgsrc or OpenBSD.
* qt4 will soon hit the ports tree. Having and "old, but stable" qt3 and a new 
shiny version of qt is enough IMHO

The EXPIRATION_DATE feature was specially introduced to find out if someone is 
still interested in these ports. So if you still think we need to keep this 
ports, feel to grab maintainership and remove the EXPIRATION_DATE.

regards
tilman