Hi! > Christian Weisgerber wrote on 09/29/2016 18:57: > > Mathieu Arnold: > > > >> If the software has not been moved to some other place, (it takes about > >> 30 seconds to click the automatic migration to github thing, and it is > >> usually done within the hour,) since march 2015, it is most likely > >> abandoned and should not be kept in the ports tree. > > > > That's a bold new policy. > > > > In the past, if the upstream was gone and the maintainer judged the > > software still useful (at their discretion, not based on a cut-off > > date), they would even fall back to providing the distfile at > > people.freebsd.org. > > I don't think it is good to remove ports just because source was not > updated for some time. There are ports useful even 10 years after last > update. Namely pnm2ppa is really old piece of code. It was removed from > ports tree because there was not maintainer. So I must become a > maintainer and now the port is alive again. > I think there should not be policy to remove ports if they have > maintainer or some user using them if only thing which should be done is > to change SRC url.
I agree, old code does not mean it's useless code. We probably need a way to find out how often a pkg is downloaded from a repo to understand which ports/pkg are really used in our user base. This helps to decide if a port is really no longer in use. -- [email protected] +49 171 3101372 4 years to go ! _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
