On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Max Khon <fjoe_at_samodelkin.net> wrote: > Hello! > > I know that it is too early to speak about this, but I would like the > dust in the mailing lists to settle down before real actions can be > taken. > > As soon as ports/ (and doc/) are moved to SVN I do not see any > compelling reasons for keeping CVS in the base system. > Those who still use it for development can install ports/devel/opencvs > (like all the src/ developers do for ports/devel/subversion/). > > In my opinion it is just another piece of bitrot that resides in the > base system for no real reasons. This "bitrot" is being used daily here. And very heavily at that, thank you very much. Not every CVS repo is easily converted into newfangled SVN, GIT, Mercurial etc.. repos; thus moving away from CVS in real life is sometimes pretty painful, if not utterly impossible (without heavy hacking and tweaking). I realize how much better and easier to use those new SCMs are, but CVS still has its uses. Please refrain from killing functionality that is often needed out-of-the-box on machines with no ports installed. I understand the desire to move as much as possible from our userland to ports and to end up with a minimal system, but isn't this getting a bit too eager? > Max Thanks, -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/Received on Sat Dec 03 2011 - 16:22:20 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:21 UTC