On 2012-Aug-23 16:06:18 -0400, John Baldwin <j...@freebsd.org> wrote: >On Thursday, August 23, 2012 3:41:03 pm Peter Wemm wrote: >> * Don't expect to see any 10.0-alpha/beta/rc/release/stable to *ever* >> make it to an official cvs tree. It's probably time to move a >> freebsd-ified cvs from head to ports. > >I think this is a bit premature. Just because we are moving away from >using CVS as FreeBSD's scm doesn't mean CVS isn't a useful >general-purpose tool still. For smaller repositories that don't need >fancier things like branches, CVS is quite useful and far lighter weight.
To me, this reads like the exact definition of a "ports, not base" use case. CVS (and RCS) are both GPL-licensed tools that (as of 10.x) no longer serve any purpose in the base system. I agree that they still serve a purpose (I use CVS as a SCM both at home and $work) but (IMHO) if they are not needed to support FreeBSD, they are not needed in the FreeBSD base. >I could see moving csup out to ports, but not necessarily CVS. Ideally, csup would learn how to talk to a SVN repository so it can continue to be used to update a local src tree (without needing to install subversion). Failing that, csup should probably also go. -- Peter Jeremy
pgpNb5AENPidH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
