Policy on `obsolete` ports...

[Perry E. Metzger]

Howdy! As things stand, we don't explicitly say much in our rules about 
whether people can remove obsolete ports after a year even without a 
port maintainer's say-so. We also have circumstances where people leave 
"maintainer" lines in ports that have been put into `obsolete`.

I'd like to propose the following rules:

1. There must always be a comment in a `PortGroup obsolete` Portfile 
stating the date on which the port can be removed. (Ideally we'd 
actually have a keyword for this so tools could find it, but a comment 
works for now.) In case there isn't a comment, the date of the commit is 
used.

2. Once something is `Portgroup obsolete`, it should no longer be 
considered to have a maintainer. After all, there's no longer anything 
being built or maintained. Thus, `maintainer` should be set to 
`nomaintainer` for such files. If there's still a `maintainer` in an 
`obsolete` port, that is an accident and can be ignored for purposes of 
removing the port at the end of the one year timeout.

3. Setting a port `obsolete` should be considered automatic consent to 
remove it in one year's time, and there should be no question that a 
year is a sufficient chance to think better of it and bring it back in 
some form.

4. If a subport is set `obsolete`, the usual rules about the maintainer 
needing to consent to touching the Portfile should not apply for 
removing said subport in a year, as the one year is (again) enough time 
for them to think better on it.

Do people think these suggested rules are okay? Are there any objections?


Perry