GPC 2006 (Pascal) -- deprecated or "expired"??

Ade Lovett ade at
Sun Jun 5 03:21:17 UTC 2011

On Jun 04, 2011, at 21:36 , Mikhail T. wrote:

> On 04.06.2011 18:27, Doug Barton wrote:
>> The math on this is simple, there are maintainers willing to do the work, or not.
> It does not matter, whether there are any such maintainers, /if there is no work to do/. Neither lang/gpc nor databases/db2 (for one more example) required a maintainer at all, when they got "pre-emptively" killed...

Incorrect.  But you already knew that.  Fundamental infrastructure changes are coming.  Yes, it's a cabal, and yes, you weren't invited.  This will require "tweaking things".  When that level of changes happens, things that are marked MAINTAINER=ports at are the _first_ to get nuked.  Why?  Because no-one actually cares enough to maintain things, as opposed to merely using them.

> Every port in the universe (interestingly, all of them happened to be in the Solar system), /that continues to build through changes in the base OS/. That's quite achievable -- in fact, we had just that until fairly recently...

Horsecrap[tm].  src/ changes are in fact the least of our worries (but you knew that already).  Making Stuff Work[tm] through ports/ infrastructural changes is a whole different ball game.  Surprisingly enough, we do spend considerable time working through edge cases to try to make <random-port> continue to function, but given a choice between making the infrastructure better, as opposed to a few MAINTAINER=ports@ things falling by the wayside.  It's a no-brainer.

But you already knew that.

Enjoy your perfect universe.  Those of us in the real world will make choices.


More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list