Re: rcs

On 10/09/13 15:47, Julian Elischer wrote:
> On 10/9/13 3:20 PM, Hans Ottevanger wrote:
>> On 10/08/13 04:31, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
>>> Okay folks, can we make a call about keeping the RCS tools in the base?
>>>
>>> The proponents wanting to remove RCS need to speak up and make their
>>> technical case.
>>>
>> Technically it is quite simple: I need RCS to start versioning config
>> files, even before starting any customization. I know about several
>> others who do the same (and have not yet defected to Linux).
>>
>> I would like to see RCS to be put back into the tree for 10.0. If it
>> really -has- to be victimized by the current anti-GPL crusade, it could
>> be replaced by OpenRCS in 11.
>>
>> And as a long time hard-core user I would appreciate if this kind of
>> changes were  performed only after at least -some- public discussion.
>> The way this change was sneaked in (though apparently with approval of
>> core_at_),  reminds me more of a Secret Society than of an Open Source
>> project.
> 
> no, with private  approval of a CORE MEMBER.. that is quite a different
> thing..
> Core, AFAIK has not ruled on this sort of topic.. (and actually it's not
> really it's job to do so unless it's resolving a dispute.)
> 

You are probably right, but as a relative outsider I only saw this in
the commit message:

Log:
  Good bye RCS.  You will be missed.

  (devel/rcs and devel/rcs57 are available as alternatives)

  Approved by:	core
  Approved by:	re (hrs)

which led me to my possibly wrong conclusion about the approval of core_at_.

Kind regards,

Hans