Re: Removing CVS from base
John Baldwin 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. I could see moving csup out to ports, but not necessarily CVS. Agreed. Principle of least suprise. CVS seems a standard Unix tool source archive format, something people from other Unix distribs might expect by default. ( Like SCCs once was, between the mists of PWB, forward beyond a BSD-4.23 Symmetric 375 (ex Bill Jollitz of 386BSD) For those of us that have [had to] work with lots of different Unix flavours, it's a PITA having gratuitious extra UNIX variant weirdnesses; (This missing here, that missing or renamed there etc). No need to make standard FreeBSD base awkward for people visiting from other Unixes. To avoid making 7.4M of src/contrib/cvs We have WITHOUT_CVS in man src.conf. Cheers, Julian -- Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultants Munich http://berklix.com Reply below not above, cumulative like a play script, indent with . Format: Plain text. Not HTML, multipart/alternative, base64, quoted-printable. Mail from Yahoo Hotmail to be dumped @Berklix. http://berklix.org/yahoo/ ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Removing CVS from base
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. I could see moving csup out to ports, but not necessarily CVS. -- John Baldwin ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Removing CVS from base
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
