Re: rcs

> > I think the fact is that most direct users of RCS use it in a very 
> > simple way, and
> > it works just fine for that.  with no real need for any updates or any 
> > change.
> 
> With all due respect Julian, The more we discuss this more this really 
> points to the problem that FreeBSD appears to be a challenge to install 
> packages into such that a package moving out of base is such a big deal.
> 
> Can we fix that instead?
> 
> I mean, this change should really not be a big deal, but yet it is and 
> this speaks to the core of FreeBSD utility.

Not commenting on RCS here, but on the concept of moving packages out
of the base:

- For some of us, the attraction of FreeBSD is that it is a tightly
integrated system, and the base contains enough useful functionality
that we don't *have* to add a lot of packages.

- Each package that is moved out of the base system means less useful
functionality in the base system - and for me: Less reason to use
FreeBSD instead of Linux.

I absolutely see the problem of maintaining out-of-date packages in
the base system, and the desirability of making the base system less
reliant on GPL. I'm mostly troubled by the fact that there seems to
be a rather strong tendency the last few years of having steadily
less functionality in the base system - and I'm not at all convinced
that the right balance has been found here.

This discussion is not new, and I don't expect to convince any new
persons...

Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug_at_nethelp.no