From nobody Sun Jun 16 09:32:02 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4W27844c7Nz5NQKB for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2024 09:32:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from mx0.gentlemail.de (mx0.gentlemail.de [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800::a130]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4W27836Xr6z4gG5 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2024 09:32:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of freebsd@omnilan.de designates 2a00:e10:2800::a130 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=freebsd@omnilan.de Received: from mh0.gentlemail.de (ezra.dcm1.omnilan.net [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800:0:0:0:0:a135]) by mx0.gentlemail.de (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 45G9W3kK045892 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2024 11:32:03 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) X-Authentication-Warning: mx0.gentlemail.de: Host ezra.dcm1.omnilan.net [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800:0:0:0:0:a135] claimed to be mh0.gentlemail.de Received: from [172.21.3.1] (s1.omnilan.de [217.91.127.234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mh0.gentlemail.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E66B4C2E for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2024 11:32:02 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2024 11:32:02 +0200 List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-ports List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird From: Harry Schmalzbauer Subject: Another berserker victim: 03b36d9 textproc/obsidian: Remove expired port To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Content-Language: en-US, de-DE Organization: OmniLAN Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spamd-Bar: -- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.93 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.64)[-0.638]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx:c]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; XM_UA_NO_VERSION(0.01)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:61157, ipnet:2a00:e10:2800::/38, country:DE]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; HAS_ORG_HEADER(0.00)[]; HAS_XAW(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-ports@freebsd.org]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-ports@freebsd.org]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[omnilan.de]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4W27836Xr6z4gG5 Please stop removing perfectly working ports from the tree. textproc/obsidian is the latest victim, just because it currently depends on devel/electron25 - which builds and runs perfectly well too. User can in-app update obsidian. If the package building team already blacklisted devel/electron25 to circumvent interference, why not keep it that way? Historically, ports tree was for the users, not for the package building team.  It worked well like two decades for both parties, but the last two years there were many ports killed for no reason, resp. by completely meaningless justifications like 'it's old' - there haven't been new upstream commits for years. There is the BROKEN variable for the reason that even non perfectly working ports can be kept in the tree to be discovered by fellows having time to fix it.  Erasing work which people already invested to create a port is for no benefit to anybody/anything. Let it up to the users' decision how they want to deal with 'pkg audit' results. There are people running FreeBSD offline - because FreeBSD can be kept offline easily and it's easy to run your own package building environment - even installing ports without building packages still is an option today. The new habit of ports tree cleanup does harm that outstanding FreeBSD feature and just boosts the disadvantage over Linux that we don't have applications available which are available on Linux. I vote for needing explicit maintainer approval before anyone is allowed to remove any ports from the tree. If the current maintainer isn't responding or a specific port doesn't have a maintainer, the users' should have a veto option at least. Blindly removing ports is counter productive to the project, imho. -harry