On 18 Aug 2011 08:15, "Matthias Andree" <mand...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > Am 18.08.2011 08:20, schrieb Chris Rees: > > On 18 August 2011 09:03, <per...@pluto.rain.com> wrote: > >> Chris Rees <utis...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> We don't want to provide broken software. > >> > >> Mark Linimon <lini...@lonesome.com> wrote: > >> > >>> ... it's obsolete, broken, junk ... > >> > >> Unless there is more to this than is reported in those two PRs, > >> I'd call it a considerable exaggeration to describe diskcheckd > >> as "broken". > >> > >> * http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/115853 > >> is shown as "closed", so presumably is no longer a problem. > > > > Wow, would it have been too difficult to actually READ the closing > > message from Jeremy? I suggest you look again -- I've pasted it here > > so you can see it. > > > > "The problem here is that the code does not do what the manpage says (or > > vice-versa). The 3rd column does not specify frequency of checking, but > > rather, over what duration of time to spread a single disk scan over. > > Thus, 7 days would mean "spread the entire disk check at X rate over the > > course of 7 days". There is still a bug in the code where large disks > > will cause problems resulting in updateproctitle() never getting called, > > and so on, but that's unrelated to this PR. I'm closing the PR because > > trying to fix all of this should really be ben@'s responsibility. > > (Sorry for sounding harsh.)" > > > > How does that indicate it's fixed? It's an 'abandoned' PR. > > This would be a case for marking it suspended (or possibly analyzed, > depending on which of these two fits best), rather than closing it. > The status is also a statement... > > > Thank you for testing and investigating, this is what the port has > > needed, and two days of being deprecated has achieved more than 18 > > months of a PR being open. > > So the bottom line for this case is, we sometimes only get sufficient > attention through deprecating ports. Unfortunately that approach might > wear off some day. Too bad. :-(
I don't see how, ignoring a PR, nothing happens. Ignore a depreciation, port dies! Let's get this straight, I was not 'attracting attention', I was saying 'I'm going to remove this port; it's been broken for over a year.' > Do we need a "think twice before adding a port" habit? Yes. Of course, these aren't pointless ports however; while still developed and maintained they were once useful. It's time to go when they break and bitrot. Chris _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"