On Sunday 29 March 2009, Ron Jensen wrote: > On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 01:55 -0700, syd adams wrote: > > I have to agree here ... seems pointless to keep them in cvs if > > gerard will have maintained versions available ... > > Also saves everyone's time down the road trying to explain why > > it's broken and where to get the current version.:) > > Cheers > > And I disagree. We should leave them in CVS. There is no point > in causing their removal from everyone who uses CVS's hard-drive > at this time. > > Ron >
If the aircraft is going to be maintained ex-cvs but not maintained within cvs, then retaining it within cvs just adds another unmaintained aircraft to the list. While someone, at some point in the future, may adopt it, until that actually happens all you're achieving by keeping it in cvs is making an obsolete version available, which is worse than useless. A link to the maintained version makes much more sense. LeeE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
