Time to mark portupgrade deprecated?

[Steve Wills]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 07/25/11 08:25, Tilman Keskinöz wrote:
> 
> I shortly went through the list.
> 
> There are currently 22 PRs filed against portupgrade
> 
> Of these:
> 
> 4	are general problems of the ports collection/pkg_tools.
> (architecture-specific INDEX, Detecting of OPTIONs set,
> Overriding/removing files changed by the user etc.)
> 
> 2	are documentation bugs
> 
> 1	wishlist item
> 
> 4 	contain patches
> 
> 1 	i believed is already fixed, i set to feedback.
> 
> So this leaves the following, which need someone (a maintainer?) to
> investigate/write a patch:
> 

<snip>

> IMHO the situation is not that bad, that we need to DEPRECATE it.
> 

Many thanks for going through them, that helps a great deal.

I submitted some changes which should help with Ruby 1.9 compatibility,
which Stanislav has pushed out to portupgrade-devel. I did some minimal
testing with them, but they need more testing. If folks could test the
updated portupgrade-devel, with both Ruby 1.8 and Ruby 1.9, I'd
appreciate it. That would help us get past the Ruby 1.9 compatibility issue.

Thanks,
Steve
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (FreeBSD)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJOLqQ1AAoJEPXPYrMgexuhI0oH/RtLURpZgsANqGVs9QrQPn5W
Haf9wt6sHnWa/1pXL9EoIUmEy8LPvRS9P4kFMwr8zNLtXjjK7ChhSALWApxoLgcE
YsJND4ATcQun4mYCMxVECvvRM6egl1u/UmJGO3jOXJz6Dv0Ik5GB8y+3Ssepx5ls
QIkEbXU+oXyq2pIsDajWLGBGEAPAOEaVphdLY9Hhvv+tQJDqlZHOkISVa6pqG4zM
Kh7upMftP4ce53kC4CPupqXxK9m5OIo4/v+jbNzqmEkySk/CDZvN6qTSWGNVSH5r
20k6ggykmvqS6A7vmaYHxTdwtq1bn+J+YzryIOAyK9+VWVPLxbCMG8URRB8C2GY=
=08aD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----