On Sun, 2004-01-11 at 00:05, Peter Jeremy wrote: > On Sat, Jan 10, 2004 at 05:01:13PM -0500, Garance A Drosihn wrote: > >At 9:35 PM +0000 1/10/04, Andrew Boothman wrote: > >>Peter Schuller wrote: > >> > >>>Most of the noteworthy features of subversion are listed > >>>on the project front page: > >>> > >>> http://subversion.tigris.org/ > >> > >>A significant one of which is the fact that it's available > >>under a BSD-style license. Meaning that the project wouldn't > >>have to rely on more GPLed code. > >> > >>I wonder if our SCM would be brought into the base system or > >>whether it would just be left in ports? > > > >We haven't even started to *test* subversion yet, so I think > >it's a bit early to worry about this question! > > I disagree. Andrew raised two issues (type of license and port vs > base location). The type of license is an input to the decision as > to which SCM to choose - BSD would be preferable but GPL is probably > acceptable (given two potential SCMs with similar features, the BSD > licensed one would be selected in preference to the GPL one).
Subversion has a friendly BSD-ish license but it depends heavily on Sleepycat DB which doesn't. I imagine that if we do end up using it one day, it would be best managed as a port rather than part of the base system. I just don't see many people agreeing on importing subversion+db-4.2+apache2 into src/contrib... _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
