On 2020-08-04 20:43, Steve Wills wrote:

> We welcome any constructive feedback. All input would be heard, and if the 
> plans need to be amended, we will come back to you with the amended plan in a 
> couple of weeks. This process will take some time and hopefully won't be too 
> disruptive to anyone's usual workflow.

As a total random user with no direct role in the ports life, except
than being portsnap user, may I suggest that the "removal" may be
instead a "replace" of the portsnap binary with a script or whatever
that runs the "new-standard-method"? 

I mean, it took me ages to learn portsnap fetch and portsnap update, if
I run them as usual I wouldn't care at all if behind the scenes it's
doing a svn update, a git fetch or whatever you choose.

I've been bitten hard by nslookup removal in the past year being done
the hard way while a gentle "factory built-in" alias nslookup =
host/dig/whatever would have saved me a lot of cursings... 

Thanks. 

--- 

Andrea Brancatelli
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to