On 2026-10-26 14:38, Thierry Thomas wrote:
Le lun. 26 oct. 26 à 12:44:22 +0100, Daniel Engberg <[email protected]>
écrivait :
x11/budgie: Remove from tree
Broken for more than 5 months in tree without any PRs submitted
Removes Budgie desktop and related ports
I'd like to strongly express that I think this is not a proper way to
manage the FreeBSD port tree in this case (especially in this case, not
only though...).
To my understanding there's the BROKEN flag available in the ports
framework, which perfectly matches here and should have been set as a
first measure.
You are correct. It should not have been removed the way it was.
It should be put back and marked BROKEN.
If for some unknown reason removing other's work makes live easier for
ports tree people@freeebsd, mark it for removal (deprecate) at the same
time, before nuking this port.
Agreed.
According to what?
According to common sense and the respect of the users.
No need of a written policy fot that.
There is a policy, I've already linked to it again since you don't
appear to not be aware.
https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/porters-handbook/book/#dads-deprecated
"Permanently broken ports will be removed from the tree entirely."
It has been broken for more than 5 months, there are no package(s) and
no PR(s) about fixing it or it being missing including quarterly so what
users are you referring to? Additionally as Roland pointed you can fix
it, use old port as base and update it if you're attached to it.
Best regards,
Daniel
