editors/xed name collision

[Charlie Li]

Adam Weinberger wrote:
> Setting PORTNAME=xed undoes any benefit of putting it in editors/x-ed,
> as the PKGBASE will conflict.
> 
The editors/x-ed location is merely temporary; I didn't even add it to
INDEX pending a final consensus on what to do.
> I agree that the current editors/xed looks completely abandoned (both
> upstream and within the ports tree), and I have no objection to
> replacing it. That said, I think the current port will need to be
> deleted and the replacement svn add'ed. The port isn't actually being
> "upgraded" to the new xed, and making the svn history seem that way
> would serve no benefit.
> 
> Even though it's likely that nobody is using the current xed, it
> really should have a deprecation notice (backported to quarterly),
> even if it's short.
> 
Of course. The git diff shown doesn't do the whole process justice
(hence "barring how git messed up file/path-level semantics"), as the
new editors/xed actually needs repocopied from editors/gedit since xed
originally forked from gedit. Putting a deprecation notice on the old
editors/xed and MFHing it immediately sounds good.

-- 
Charlie Li
…nope, still don't have an exit line.

(This email address is for mailing list use; replace local-part with
vishwin for off-list communication if possible)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20190421/471c0cdb/attachment.sig>