Aggressive ports removal (was: svn commit: r546907 - head/x11-clocks/wmtime)

[Adam Weinberger]

> On Aug 29, 2020, at 20:33, Mark Linimon <linimon at lonesome.com> wrote:
> 
> On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 06:50:22PM -0600, Adam Weinberger wrote:
>> the problem is that we abuse the BROKEN variable.  Ports that don't
>> adapt aren't necessarily broken (unless they no longer build and are
>> actually broken).  We have a habit of using BROKEN to mean "someone
>> should take a look at this."  Perhaps we need a better way of
>> signifying this.
> 
> Hmm, I though that was what DEPRECATED was for?

The semantics are a little different. There’s nothing to differentiate things that we have confidently deprecated, vs things that we’d like people to please take a look at before we give up on it. I think part of the resistance to marking things for expiration is that we lump “this no longer has a purpose” in with “please give this some TLC or we’ll let it go.”

# Adam


—
Adam Weinberger
adamw at adamw.org
https://www.adamw.org