On Sat, 23 Dec 2017, Matthias Andree wrote:
Am 23.12.2017 um 08:12 schrieb Kevin Oberman:
So, why does Eugene's question have no relevance to the procmail
case? Could you please explain?
Because I am not willing to discuss generics when we have a specific
case of port at hand.
The attempted generalization distracts from that, and I insinuate that
distraction is the purpose.
Everyone is free to start a new thread about general port maintenance
and removal principles.
I think the best reason to keep procmail available in ports is that
there are still quite a number of people still using it.
In fact opensource.com has an article dated 11/01/2017 titled:
SpamAssassin, MIMEDefang, and Procmail: Best Trio of 2017
https://opensource.com/article/17/11/spamassassin-mimedefang-and-procmail
Not necessarily an argument for code safety but a good argument that it's
still being used by quite a number of people.
I think that as long as someone is willing to patch the software when
vulnerabilities come up we should keep the port available.
Ted Hatfield
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
