recent ports removal

[Ruslan Mahmatkhanov]

Doug Barton wrote on 30.09.2011 22:04:
> On 09/30/2011 02:54, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote:
>> Doug Barton wrote on 30.09.2011 13:50:
>>> On 09/30/2011 02:40, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote:
>>>> Hi, Doug.
>>>>
>>>> You just removed www/pyblosxom. But we have a pr, that update it to
>>>> latest (not-vulnerable) version: http://bugs.freebsd.org/160682.
>>>
>>> Julien took that PR, when he's ready to do the update he can pull the
>>> files out of the Attic.
>>>
>>>
>>> Doug
>>
>> Ok, but as far i recall, there in ports@ was sounded a policy like "we
>> do not remove the ports with open pr's on them".
>
> I think you misunderstand what "remove" means in this context. :)  Or
> perhaps you've never worked with a version control system ... It's

[just for thrulz]
Yes, it's my second day around the computer system.
[/just for thrulz]

> honestly hard for me to understand why it's hard for people to
> understand this concept. When Julien is ready to do his work all he has
> to do is type 'cvs co -D 2011-09-29 ports/www/pyblosxom
> ports/www/Makefile' and then do his thing. Because a port has been
> "removed" today is completely irrelevant to the possibility that it will
> come back in a non-vulnerable form tomorrow.

I understand that it can be restored in one click, but what the point to 
remove it in first place if it known that someone already working on it 
and will undelete it in near time? As far i understand it makes 
commiter's life little a bit harder and most important - it confuses the 
users, who actually using this ports.

Ok, actually i'm asking all this questions in first place because your 
action on pyblosxom did not conform with this sentence by bapt@:

"""
 > How can ports be removed if the solutions for them is in gnats?
 >

They won't before deleting ports, we always check gnats, if a PR exists 
then we leave the ports so that the PR can be committed
"""

http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2011-September/069998.html

So i'm just curious what is the agreed policy about such ports? Please 
don't get me wrong.

[...]

>
>
> hth,
>
> Doug
>


-- 
Regards,
Ruslan

Tinderboxing kills... the drives.