Hi Adam, > Am 12.08.2019 um 02:17 schrieb Adam Weinberger <[email protected]>: > > On Sun, Aug 11, 2019 at 5:50 PM Martin Waschbüsch <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> Hi Adam, >> >>> Am 11.08.2019 um 23:22 schrieb Adam Weinberger <[email protected]>: >>> >>> On Sun, Aug 11, 2019 at 1:05 PM Franco Fichtner <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Quarterly is essentially useless if the decision is to immediately axe a >>>> deprecated release. 3 months are nothing in production environments, if >>>> you get 3 months (1,5 months mean) at all and also all other updates and >>>> security relevant bug fixes in the same quarterly that you desperately >>>> need. >>>> >>>> Yeah, we know that won’t happen so please don’t suggest it. >>>> >>>> That deprecation policy is nice and well all by itself except when it >>>> wreaks havoc over the ports infrastructure like in the case of PHP version >>>> support where numerous ports are immediately unavailable and incompatible >>>> with upgrades. >>>> >>>> Furthermore, the argument that it is more more work to maintain an >>>> abandoned version is silly because it’s more work to delete a port that to >>>> just keep it in the tree for a while longer. >>> >>> That last part isn't correct. The work of deleting the ports is >>> largely automated and simple, and it will always happen eventually. >>> The work involved is in supporting unsupported versions. Our php team >>> is spread very thin, and they simply cannot support php versions >>> outside of upstream development. There are no resources to backport >>> fixes that may or may not be designed to work with older versions >> >> I do not understand this. At all. >> And I sort of hope I misunderstood you, because it sounds like you think a >> maintainer is or may be regarded as someone who can be expected to provide >> product support of some kind? >> I find that notion worrying to say the least. > > If you believe that handling updates, analyzing submitted and upstream > patches and development, and answering a bevy of questions for every > major update is effortless, then you drastically underestimate the > amount of work that goes into the ports tree.
You completely misunderstand me. I know there is a lot of effort going into this. I disagree only in that I do not believe there should be any expectations towards maintainers. It is voluntary work. Spare time, etc. I am grateful for the effort people put into this, but I strongly believe no one should act towards volunteers with any expectations as to what they should do, how much time they spend, etc. So, I find it wrong to say, as I understood you, to remove a package from the ports tree because otherwise others people, for instance users of FreeBSD, would have the *expectation* of receiving support for those packages. That perception of any kind of entitlement towards volunteers is wrong, IMHO. And that is why I answered that part of your message because it is not (for reasons stated above) a valid argument against having outdated software in the ports tree. _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
