Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 10:23:38AM +0100, Johan van Selst wrote: > > Actually, I don't really see the benefit of this port. But there was > > a request for it and it seemed like little effort to maintain it ;) > Per quoted above, it should not be added. Contrary to GNU versions of sed > and awk, if base ed(1) can be used as drop-in replacement, over-populating > ports collection just because someone wanted to remain their work in the > history does not warrant it. I believe the best would be to follow up with > maintainer and either 1) find out and explain in pkg-descr what this port > can do that base ed(1) cannot; or 2) cvs rm it.
It is not a question of a maintainer wanting their name in the tree. I'm the maintainer of this port now - and my name is in enough locations as it is. I'll try and find out what the added value of this version is, and will remove it again if there isn't any. Ciao, Johan
pgprbZlrJDtav.pgp
Description: PGP signature
