On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 10:31:32PM +0100, Sol?ne Rapenne wrote: > Le mardi 27 f?vrier 2024, 18:46:18 CET Alexander Bluhm a ?crit : > > On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 05:58:59PM +0100, Solene Rapenne wrote: > > > I removed net/sendxmpp which had net/p5-Net-XMPP as a run dependency, > > > however p5-Net-XMPP is used by p5-Net-Jabber but the latter doesn't > > > have any reverse dep. > > > > > > I suggest to remove both as we have no programs using them in ports. > > > > Having Perl modules in the ports tree without program using them > > is common. I maintain a lot to such ports that I use for my own > > projects. > > > > Personally I have no need for p5-Net-XMPP or p5-Net-Jabber. But > > as long as they work and are not completely outdated, why remove > > them? > > > > bluhm > > I get your point, from my perspective p5-Net-Jabber 2.0 was released in 2004 > and p5-Net-XMPP in 2014, and only one has a maintainer. Their old age doesn't > mean they can't be used, but for sure they are not maintained and not up to > date with XMPP protocol. > > We have no consumers to know if these libs are still working fine, given > sendxmpp wasn't working with TLS servers, I suppose p5-Net-XMPP is not > reliable. > > I don't really care if we remove them or not to be honest, I thought we had > to > clean libs that didn't had consumers like in this case.
Abandoned upstream, security issues, TLS incompatibilities, incompatible with the current protocol are arguments to remove. If that is the case, feel free. Just old and not used within ports tree is not an argument to remove. Being useless is. bluhm
