On Sat, Dec 23, 2017 at 2:42 AM, Matthias Andree <[email protected]> wrote:
> Am 23.12.2017 um 08:12 schrieb Kevin Oberman: > > > > So, why does Eugene's question have no relevance to the procmail > > case? Could you please explain? > > Because I am not willing to discuss generics when we have a specific > case of port at hand. > The attempted generalization distracts from that, and I insinuate that > distraction is the purpose. > Everyone is free to start a new thread about general port maintenance > and removal principles > OK. I'm not sure this is in any way fair and not just avoidance, but why, specifically, should THIS port with no known vulnerabilities, people who are willing to work to fix it, and a fair number of users, be a so special that it deserves summary execution from FreeBSD? Yes, it's unmaintained. The upstream authors/maintainers advised a move to another port. But why should THIS port be removed from hte system? -- Kevin Oberman, Part time kid herder and retired Network Engineer E-mail: [email protected] PGP Fingerprint: D03FB98AFA78E3B78C1694B318AB39EF1B055683 _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
