Re: Rewrite cvsup & portupgrade in C

On Wednesday 2004-07-07 08:57 am, Steve Kargl wrote:

> This is a red herring.  This is the FreeBSD project.  Other projects and
> OSes can do their own work.

I really don't understand this logic.  There is nothing FreeBSD-specific 
about CVSup from what I can see - it's a generic tool to synchronize data 
from a remote CVS tree.  We don't have BSDftp or BSDhttp, but we seem happy 
to have BSDcvs.

> They can then contribute their work back to the EZM3 maintainer to provide
> the portability you crave.   

Noone else is interested in our tool, no matter how great it is, because 
it's a pain in the neck to use if you're not already using FreeBSD.  That 
means that we have to bear the entire onus of maintaining it, developing 
it, and porting its language to new release / hardware combinations.  Is 
there a queue of people eagerly awaiting the chance to carry ezm3 forward, 
or is it a chore that someone gets saddled with because they want to use 
the only commonly used program that's written in it?

> How many active ia64 (and ppc) developers does the FreeBSD platform
> have?  Well, there's Marcel.  Would you rather he work on the
> kernel or ezm3?  You've suggested the modulo-3 is a dead language,
> how would you categorize the ia64 architecture?

People are still buying IA64 systems (for reasons beyond me).  Noone besides 
the few people qualified to work on cvsup is using ezm3 that I'm aware of.
-- 
Kirk Strauser