[Bug 232058] mail/mutt-lite: restore this port

[bugzilla-noreply at freebsd.org]

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=232058

            Bug ID: 232058
           Summary: mail/mutt-lite: restore this port
           Product: Ports & Packages
           Version: Latest
          Hardware: Any
                OS: Any
            Status: New
          Severity: Affects Only Me
          Priority: ---
         Component: Individual Port(s)
          Assignee: ports-bugs at FreeBSD.org
          Reporter: jdc at koitsu.org

Today I found the following:

mutt-lite-1.10.1                   ?   orphaned: mail/mutt-lite

This correlates with r481126:
https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=revision&revision=481126

2018-10-01 mail/mutt-lite: For a lite version of mutt build mail/mutt with less
(or zero) options

Which makes no mention of the history or PR, which I had to dig up myself in
r476197:

https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=revision&revision=476197

Which claims "give users 2 months to move to mail/mutt".  I saw absolutely no
message/warning about this deprecation, which indicates that the implementation
of said warning was done in such a way that **did not** take people using pkg
(binary packages) into mind.  Proof is here, indicating that only people who
built from ports (source) would see this warning:

https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/head/mail/mutt-lite/Makefile?r1=476197&r2=476196&pathrev=476197

Bug 229938 looks like the maintainer of the port decided to relinquish
maintainership (which is 100% fine!  It can go to ports@ in the meantime), and
instead opted... for its entire removal?!

What was done here is not good practise ports-wise; not everyone installs
ports, most people use binary packages, which means "build mail/mutt with less
or zero options" it not an option/choice available to them.  It's scaring me
how people don't seem to understand the relationship between ports and pkg.  I
don't know how any of this was permitted by portmgr; it is not common practise
for port deprecation to work this way.

Please either:

a) Undo this change (probably not feasible given r476197), or,

b) Create a stub port that includes fewer options as described.  (This is
exactly how tons of the *-lite, *-tiny, and *-nox11 ports work.)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.