Aggressive ports removal

[Lev Serebryakov]

On 30.08.2020 11:28, Niclas Zeising wrote:

>> Exactly.  Another case in point: x11/xtset.  Maintenance stopped in
>> 1993, 11 days after the FreeBSD project came into existence.  It works
>> fine, and I find it very useful.  If at some time in the future it
>> should no longer work with the latest and greatest iteration of the C
>> programming language or ports structure, that shouldn't be a reason to
>> discard it.
> 
> Then it is very easy.  If it is useful to you, adopt it as maintainer, then you will get a notification if it fails to build, and you can fix the issue(s)
 It is not "very easy".
 What if port which is like `x11/xtset` is used by 100 users and 0 developers/committers?
 What should these 100 users (not programmers by any means) do when next `pkg upgrade` will try to delete this package?

 `-fcommon/-fno-common` and nay other infrastructure/compiler changes ARE NOT user-visible problems, and MUST NOT be transferred to users.

 Unpatched security vulnerabilities ARE user-visible problems. Our developers' dances around C/C++ standards and other hacker toys ARE NOT.

-- 
// Lev Serebryakov

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 963 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20200831/8aae9884/attachment.sig>