expiration of net/skype ?!
mato
gamato at users.sf.net
Sun May 1 07:26:51 UTC 2011
Chris Rees wrote:
>
>
> On 1 May 2011 07:58, "mato" <gamato at users.sf.net
> <mailto:gamato at users.sf.net>> wrote:
> >
> > Peter Jeremy wrote:
> >>
> >> On 2011-Apr-26 01:47:30 +0200, martinko<gamato at users.sf.net
> <mailto:gamato at users.sf.net>> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> So what is this deprecation and expiration of net/skype port please ??
> >>>
> >>
> >> Whilst the Skype port still works, the version of Skype referenced by
> >> the port is no longer available and later versions of Skype do not
> >> (currently) work on FreeBSD. My reading of the Skype license suggests
> >> that the FreeBSD Project cannot host the distfile without an agreement
> >> with Skype. This means that someone who doesn't currently have the
> >> Skype distfile cannot install the Skype port.
> >>
> >> I believe work is underway to support the currently available version
> >> of Skype.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Ok, from my understanding it wouldn't be the first time a port
> distfile is not (easily) available yet the port itself works if one
> can get the distfile. And it's very easy to search successfully the
> interwebs for this particular distfile. In such a case I see no
> reason to remove the port if it works (under condition one gets the
> distfile). I myself have it (and I even host it privately). And
> reading mailing lists reveals there are many people using the port.
> >
>
> If one is capable of finding a distfile it's a trivial addition to
> find the port.
>
> Rather than having defective ports in the tree, perhaps you could host
> the Skype shar? With a decent title it'll probably show up early
> enough on a Google search.
>
> Chris
>
That is one of possibilities. The question is whether we want to lower
barriers for new / common users or not. Experience suggests that people
will choose a different solution if it makes their life easier. See my
other recent post please.
Regards,
M.
More information about the freebsd-multimedia
mailing list