On 05/06/12 22:33, Daniel Ericsson wrote: > hg-forest isn't even compatible with mercurial 2.x, without a > maintainer or a replacing port can we just remove it? or do we need a > grace period as the guide says?
If the port is broken already for the last 6 months after mercurial was upgraded to 2.0, I don't see a reason to keep it any further. Apparently, nobody cared to file a ticket anyway. > I do think the replaced_by is a bit heavy handed if it works like > explained in the guide, swapping out peoples hgsvn install for > hgsubversion on upgrade feels wrong even though hgsubversion might be > a better approach. Is there a precedent for stopping new installs of > a port but not swapping out peoples existing installs? This could be implemented by increasing the revison and using ui_error with explanation and instructions followed by a 'return -code error' in the pre-fetch phase. Several ports do something like this to limit installation to specific versions of Mac OS X. Rainer _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
