On Wed, 5 May 1999, Brian Behlendorf wrote: > On Sat, 1 May 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > My suggestion would be to wait and see how bitkeeper pans out. Enough > > people in the Linux camp have already looked at CVSup and gone "ooh, > > sexy!" that I think there will already be significant pressure to > > develop similar tools for the bitkeeper environment. When that > > happens, we can start to look at this more seriously. > > I think that's wise. > > I'd also recommend people check out Bitkeeper's license before making any > final decisions. It's not GPL, BSD, or any other Open Source license.
This entire BitKeeper discussion is totally worthless. We're not gonna change. Anyone here want to give up cvsup? Or kick away from a terminal addiction to ctm (and believe me, those ctm'ers are real happily addicted). The answer is no. Face it, it's *possible* that there are better management tools than cvs, but it's for darn sure we can't do better than cvsup/ctm. This discussion merits dropping, at least until someone rewrites cvsup & ctm. Don't hold your breath. ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chu...@picnic.mat.net | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 213 Lakeside Drive Apt T-1 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run picnic (FreeBSD-current) (301) 220-2114 | and jaunt (Solaris7). ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
