On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 04:47:25PM -0500, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > On Aug 10, 2016, at 13:18, Peter Danecek <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > However, how would we procede in this case, when we have no explicit > > replacement to indicate? > > I believe the obsolete 1.0 portgroup can accommodate this: include the > portgroup but don't set replaced_by. > > However, do first consider whether this needs to be done, or whether > the port can instead be left as is.
What's the benefit of replacing a port we might no longer want to keep with an explicit error message on upgrade? Instead, we could just outright delete the port, which will leave it installed on the systems of those users that had it installed (i.e. not break their system), but also no longer allow fresh installations of it. -- Clemens _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
