Removing documentation (was: [Bug 206922] Handbook: Chapter 4.5+ changes)

[John Marino]

> I am not portmgr, but do use portmaster for updating ports on systems
> running STABLE or HEAD. I still see no tool which provides the features of
> portmaster. I also realize that this is far from a universal opinion.

Please do an honest "fly-off" between ports-mgmt/portmaster and
ports-mgmt/synth.  I would love to hear what signficant thing portmaster
can do that Synth can't.  (honestly)

disclaimer: I have obvious bias, I wrote Synth and one *specific* goal
to was address claims like yours above, meaning that I wanted to remove
that excuse as a valid reason to leave portmaster in the status quo.


> I believe that the issue of it having a man page is completely irrelevant.

That was to counter the claim that portmaster "needs" documentation.
The point is that it *has* documentation.


> The handbook covers pkg, portsnap, and freebsd-update, all of which have
> very comprehensive man pages and are covered in the handbook because man
> pages and the handbook serve very different purposes. Every port should
> have a man page, though I understand why many lack one and ports that
> support the basic management of a system belong in the handbook. When
> multiple and popular tools are available for the same job, it would be good
> to summarize any different capabilities that might make one preferred over
> another.

That's not the point.  The point is a sanctioned "official" tool is not
maintained and my position is that is UNACCEPTABLE.  To be in the
handbook it must be a hard requirement to be *ADEQUATELY* maintained.  I
do not believe that requirement is being met today.

John