On Jun 17, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > 2011/6/17 Lang Hai <freeal...@gmail.com>: >> >> On Jun 17, 2011, at 2:05 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >> >>>> 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. >>> >>> That is the way it is done, anyway there still could be some false >>> positive having people to doulble check is always good :) >> Agreed, but I just feel like these ports should not be in the depreciation >> list at the first place. That's my point my I could be wrong. >>> >>>>> >>>> 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. >>> Here you are :) >>> http://www.freshports.org/search.php?stype=maintainer&method=exact&query=po...@freebsd.org >>> >> What if we just put all un-maintained ports in this list instead of in the >> depreciation list? > > They already are in this list :) That is this list I'm trying to cleanup > Oh, sorry for my misunderstanding and I will try to see whether I can save some ports from that list.
>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Hai Lang >>> >>> regards, >>> Bapt >> >> 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" >> 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"
