Opened 17 months ago
Closed 14 months ago
#67713 closed defect (fixed)
[Port Abandoned] postgresql15, postgresql15-server
Reported by: | Klogic1 | Owned by: | dgilman (David Gilman) |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | Normal | Milestone: | |
Component: | ports | Version: | 2.8.1 |
Keywords: | Cc: | jyrkiwahlstedt | |
Port: | postgresql15, postgresql15-server |
Description
unacknowledged ticket(s) - none
Port has not been updated for approximately six (6) months and is at PostgreSQL release version 15.0. The current PostgreSQL release version is 15.3. Contacted the maintainer by e-mail and received this response: “As it is, I myself haven’t updated the ports for a while now, but nobody has so far taken the maintenance as responsibility. Sorry for that :(“
Change History (5)
comment:1 Changed 17 months ago by jmroot (Joshua Root)
Cc: | jyrkiwahlstedt added; jwa@… removed |
---|
comment:2 Changed 17 months ago by ryandesign (Ryan Carsten Schmidt)
Port: | postgresql15 added |
---|---|
Summary: | [Port Abandoned] poatgresql15-server → [Port Abandoned] postgresql15, postgresql15-server |
comment:3 Changed 15 months ago by dgilman (David Gilman)
I am uploading a patch for postgresql 15.4 so there is some maintenance going on here. Note that postgresql5-server doesn't actually use the postgresql code, it's just some MacPorts scaffolding around running postgresql as a daemon so it doesn't get updated for point releases. The regular postgresql15 port has been working fine and has been more or less maintained this whole time.
comment:4 Changed 15 months ago by dgilman (David Gilman)
As a compromise maybe we can remove Jyrki Wahlstedt as the maintainer of the soon-to-be-released postgresql 16 when those portfiles are added.
comment:5 Changed 14 months ago by dgilman (David Gilman)
Owner: | set to dgilman |
---|---|
Resolution: | → fixed |
Status: | new → closed |
The criteria for declaring the port abandoned haven't actually been met in this case, as there are no unhandled tickets and the maintainer is contactable. Of course if jwa wants to drop maintainership he is free to do so, and can push that commit himself. But it doesn't really help to remove the maintainer if there's no one else volunteering to take over. A maintainer with not enough time to devote to the port is generally considered better than no maintainer at all, and anyone else is still free to open pull requests. It would probably be helpful to add
openmaintainer
though.