Python 2.7 removal outline

[Anatoly]

On Thu, 25 Mar 2021 23:06:27 -0700
Chris <portmaster at bsdforge.com> wrote:

> On 2021-03-25 22:24, Kurt Jaeger wrote:

> > The portmgr@ role is a huge task and all the reasons (limited time,
> > dayjobs, etc) ares  valid for those folks from portmgr as for
> > the rest of the ports maintainers and committers.  
> Indeed, and don't think that hadn't occurred to me. In fact I
> suspected that portmgr@ was feeling a bit overwhelmed, and that
> *that* triggered the seemingly overreaching python announcement.
> May I humbly request a petition for such large-sweeping changes? IMHO
> this will give portmgr@ the opportunity to get caught up, and perhaps
> get some assistance -- maybe we all come up with an idea that saves
> _everyones_ bacon. :-)
 
I already miss tools depending on gtk1.2, qt3, qt4 in ports.
Maybe it makes sense to introduce new "flag"
NOAUTOBUILD=	<REASON>
To mark the ports from which no packages should be build
quarterly automatically to reduce portmgr@ load, instead of just
dropping those ports out of ports tree? And leave all the care of those
ports to their maintainers, requiring them some kind of "pings" to
detect if maintainer is "alive" as the only criteria to keep port in
the tree?