On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 22:45:51 +0100 Johannes Winkelmann <jw@tks6.net> wrote:
Hi there, [cut]
Hi,
So the question is: should we leave unmaintained the way it is, losing potential updates, or should we define some basic rules on creating patches?
If we backup somewhere old ports for maintainers reference (as you suggest below) I think it's a good idea to save the users some hassle with outdated ports.
Related to this is a proposition Matt made on IRC: dropping ports which haven't been updated for a certain amount of time, and I believe this could be combined with the idea to allow changes for the CLC collection: If no maintainer updates a port, and no no patch from a user arrived at CLC for $TIME, a port is moved to a place where it can still be accessed somehow (for historians and port developers), but not served to the user anymore.
This is a good idea, a volunteer could periodically run a simple script to change the collection* / remove ports that haven't been updated for some time. A possible drawback: there could be ports that didn't actually released a new version for $TIME... Chosing a good value for $TIME could be harder than it seems. Regards, Simone * this way we should have something like contrib, unmaintained and obsolete. Users will only get the first two as usual, maintainers (or users seeking for problems) could add /obsolete to cvsup checkouts.