On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 14:54:05 -0700
Doug Barton <do...@freebsd.org> articulated:
> On 04/26/2011 14:18, Robert Huff wrote:
> > It is also possible it is only important to a fairly small
> > number ... but to those it is absolutely crucial.
>
> Fair enough, then one of them needs to step forward to maintain the
> port. :)
>
> FWIW, I think that the person who suggested deleting the port as a
> way to gain a metric of its popularity was joking ...
Sorry, but I was dead serious.
"Don't Know What You Got (Till It's Gone)"
"Cinderella"
If no one steps up claiming to need the port, then good riddance. If on
the other hand a user claims a valid use of the port, let them take
responsibility for it or find someone who will. Leaving intact ports
that either don't build, cannot be fetched, etcetera does not really
make a lot of sense.
--
Jerry ✌
jerry+po...@seibercom.net
Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the Reply-To header.
__________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
