2nd deprecation campaign
bf1783 at googlemail.com
Fri Jun 17 06:00:00 UTC 2011
On 6/17/11, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt at freebsd.org> wrote:
> 2011/6/16 b. f. <bf1783 at googlemail.com>:
>> bapt wrote:
>>>I am in the middle of a new deprecation campaign, to remove ports
>>>where no more distfiles are publicly available (no other OS mirrors
>>>doesn't count except if they are the upstream of course).
>>>Maybe some will be false positive (I will try to not have too much of
>> Could you please explain how you are checking this? Just looking at
>> some of the recent deprecations, graphics/peps, graphics/vcg, and
>> graphics/xfig are still available. On earlier ones,
>> graphics/libconvolve exists in the jack_convolve section of the heaven
>> sourceforge project:
> Those are not deprecated but broken, broken because they don't fetch
> and they need someone to take care of it, to send the new master_site
> line for example, I don't have time enough to update/fix all the
> master_site lines from the whole ports tree, so I I see none of the
> said master_site provide the distfiles, it is marked as broken because
> that is what it is.
Well, the build often isn't broken (and users don't notice that it is
"broken") because the distfile may be cached locally, or on the
project servers, so this is more a matter of policy in many cases.
But I take your point. I saw that you began doing this soon after you
announced a deprecation campaign, so I wasn't sure if your were doing
this a preliminary step, before deprecating them in the near future.
> Debian having the package doesn't mean that they are the upstream.
No, but in this case the Debian maintainer has taken over that role in
the absence of the original authors, as described in the changelog
More information about the freebsd-ports