2nd deprecation campaign

[Lang Hai]

On Jun 17, 2011, at 1:45 PM, Baptiste Daroussin 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 them).
>> 
>> 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.
> 
The depreciation is only for those ports that don't have public available distfiles right? So that I agree that broken ports should be excluded from this depreciation.

>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/heaven/files/Audio%20Applications/Jack%20Related/jack_convolve/
>> 
>> security/libident is available via one of the main vlc developers at:
>> 
>> http://www.remlab.net/files/libident/
>> 
>> comms/gsmlib is maintained by Debian:
>> 
>> http://packages.qa.debian.org/g/gsmlib.html
> 
> Debian having the package doesn't mean that they are the upstream.
>> 
>> science/bblimage has been renamed to pyvox and is available at:
>> 
>> http://www.med.upenn.edu/bbl/downloads/pyvox/
>> 
>> That's eight false positives out of eleven  deprecations that I
>> selected by inspection, and I didn't spend more than two minutes
>> checking any of them.
>> 
> 
> Keep in mind that :
> deprecated != broken
> 
> And those ports expecting for somone to look after them for a long
> time now it is done, then my process is good :)
> 
So yes, always give people chance to fix ports, not remove them from the tree.

And, do we have a list of all maintainer-wanted ports, because that would be great if we have.

>> I will fix the above.
>> 
> 
> Thanks for a lot.
> 
>> b.
>> _______________________________________________
>> freebsd-ports at freebsd.org mailing list
>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-ports at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"

Regards,
Hai Lang