On Jun 17, 2011, at 1:45 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > 2011/6/16 b. f. <bf1...@googlemail.com>: >> bapt wrote: >>> I am in the middle of a new deprecation campaign, to remove ports >>> where no more distfiles are publicly available (no other OS mirrors >>> doesn't count except if they are the upstream of course). >>> >>> Maybe some will be false positive (I will try to not have too much of them). >> >> Could you please explain how you are checking this? Just looking at >> some of the recent deprecations, graphics/peps, graphics/vcg, and >> graphics/xfig are still available. On earlier ones, >> graphics/libconvolve exists in the jack_convolve section of the heaven >> sourceforge project: >> > > Those are not deprecated but broken, broken because they don't fetch > and they need someone to take care of it, to send the new master_site > line for example, I don't have time enough to update/fix all the > master_site lines from the whole ports tree, so I I see none of the > said master_site provide the distfiles, it is marked as broken because > that is what it is. > The depreciation is only for those ports that don't have public available distfiles right? So that I agree that broken ports should be excluded from this depreciation.
>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/heaven/files/Audio%20Applications/Jack%20Related/jack_convolve/ >> >> security/libident is available via one of the main vlc developers at: >> >> http://www.remlab.net/files/libident/ >> >> comms/gsmlib is maintained by Debian: >> >> http://packages.qa.debian.org/g/gsmlib.html > > Debian having the package doesn't mean that they are the upstream. >> >> science/bblimage has been renamed to pyvox and is available at: >> >> http://www.med.upenn.edu/bbl/downloads/pyvox/ >> >> That's eight false positives out of eleven deprecations that I >> selected by inspection, and I didn't spend more than two minutes >> checking any of them. >> > > Keep in mind that : > deprecated != broken > > And those ports expecting for somone to look after them for a long > time now it is done, then my process is good :) > So yes, always give people chance to fix ports, not remove them from the tree. And, do we have a list of all maintainer-wanted ports, because that would be great if we have. >> I will fix the above. >> > > Thanks for a lot. > >> b. >> _______________________________________________ >> 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" >> > _______________________________________________ > 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" Regards, Hai Lang_______________________________________________ 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"
