On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 04:33:12PM -0700, Kevin Oberman wrote: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Christian Weisgerber <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > 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. > > > > So, will this be enforced? Will somebody go through all distfiles, > > check the time stamps in the tarballs, and mark ports as BROKEN if > > the distfile hasn't been updated since... when exactly? I guess I > > could to that. > > > > -- > > Christian "naddy" Weisgerber [email protected] > > > > This was simply a terrible idea and I would hope that the ports team would > clearly so state and back out the "BROKEN" from those ports. As others are > pointing out, lot of very old and stable code has gone over a year without > updating.
+1 > One case of import to me was mp4v2, a library for making MP4v2 formatted > files. ucpp is another example. Marked BROKEN. Broke building of libreoffice. Just brilliant. -- Steve _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
