On 1 January 2013, at 21:16, Chris H wrote: >> On 1 January 2013 15:17, Alfred Perlstein <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On 1/1/13 6:55 AM, Eitan Adler wrote: >>>> >>>> On 1 January 2013 02:54, Derek Kulinski <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> That said I would totally understand you being upset if FreeBSD would >>>>> decide to switch to git, since despite its benefits that is a huge >>>>> change, and would definitely be hard for people to adjust. >>>> >>>> Just In Case: >>>> >>>> FreeBSD has no plans to switch to get in either the short or long >>>> term. We will however offer git repositories and first-class cousins >>>> via git.freebsd.org and github. >>>> >>>> >>> Are you sure? Most of the diffs developers have been handing me lately are >>> of the form a/path b/path so I think they are mostly using git behind the >>> scenes. >> >> Yes. I use git behind the scenes as well. However, so far as I am >> aware, there are no plans in either the short or long terms to >> *convert upstream* to git. > > Thank God! I'd hate to think that after unwinding years accumulated > CVS process, to rewind it for SVN, only to have to do it again for GIT, > just seems a bit masochistic.
Is the cvs code going away? I ask because I maintain a number of local CVS repositories of code for which I am the only developer/maintainer. I also use grep on the repositories to find sections of code previously created and removed for future use. I can't bill my clients for conversion to SVN so that cost I would have to eat. I am not particularly thrilled about having to do so. I don't need most of the CVS features. About all I do is check in. Occasionally I botch up a module enough that I delete it and recover it from CVS. I don't use branches or tags. _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
