Re: Bringing back lang/python27 with few modules?

On 23/11/2021 10:54, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
> Hi!
> 
>>>>> Removing Iridium was a really bad step.
> 
>>>> To all of those that keep complaining that Iridium got removed:
>>>> feel free to bring it back and maintain it.
> 
>>> They were removed by you because they depended on python 2.7,
>>> so has the policy changed ? Can it be brought back ?
> 
>>> 2020-12-31 www/iridium: Uses Python 2.7 which is EOLed upstream
> 
>> Ah, of course, as a Chromium clone it also needs Python 2.7 for now.
>> That policy hasn't changed (not at large), but I can imagine a few
>> exceptions.
> 
> So, did the policy change ? Would bringing back Iridium be OK ?
> 
> What about palemoon ?
> 
> Yes, I now, it's annoying to nag portmgr@ about it, but having
> some options for browsers is worth the unpureness of the ports tree 8-)

What unpureness are we talking about? That maintained just because of 
Chromium and parts of KDE still depending on Python 2.7? If it is 
unpureness then it makes more sense to have this unpureness because of 
more ports needs Python 2.7, not just a few chosen. (chosen without any 
written policy / criteria definition). Iridium and some other ports have 
had stay there for a whole year the same way as Chromium did. Nothing 
changed and we still have / need Python 2.7 because of these ports.

Saying "feel free to bring it back " is very vague statement.

Kind regards
Miroslav Lachman