Re: Proposed ports deprecation and removal policy

On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 09:43:38 -0800
Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com> wrote:

> In message <864jdrzcov.fsf@ltc.des.dev>, =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?
> = w
> rites:
> > Florian Smeets <flo@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> > > Ports can be removed immediately if one of the following conditions is me=
> > t:
> > >
> > > - Upstream distfile is no longer available from the original
> > >   source/mirror (Our and other distcaches e.g. Debian, Gentoo, etc do
> > >   not count as "available")
> >
> > Strong disagree, give the maintainer a chance to find an alternate
> > mirror or self-host.
> 
> +1

+1 about this point, too.
Silly service providers changes their brand and domain, WITH THEIR
USERS FORCIBLY INCLUDING.

This immediately causes original upstream URI unavailable, even though
actual project DOES NOT AT ALL CHANGES.

And more importantly, some users dislikes such a domain name policy and
switch service provider. Of course, this causes original upstream URI
dissappear.


> 
> >
> > > - Upstream WWW is unavailable: deprecate, remove after 3 months
> >
> > That's the opposite of immediate removal
> >
> > > - BROKEN for more than 6 months
> >
> > Agree but that's hardly immediate
> >
> > > - has known vulnerabilities that weren=E2=80=99t addressed in the ports t=
> > ree
> > >   for more than 3 months
> >
> > Agree but that's hardly immediate
> >
> > DES
> > --=20
> > Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@FreeBSD.org
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com>
> FreeBSD UNIX:  <cy@FreeBSD.org>   Web:  https://FreeBSD.org
> NTP:           <cy@nwtime.org>    Web:  https://nwtime.org
> 
> 			e^(i*pi)+1=0


-- 
Tomoaki AOKI    <junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp>