Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 21:34:01 +0800 From: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> To: Graham Todd <gtodd@bellanet.org> Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org>, freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: rcs Message-ID: <52555B49.1070207@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1310081527250.1964@wawanesa.iciti.ca> References: <60177810-8DC4-4EA3-8040-A834B79039D2@orthanc.ca> <52538EDC.2080001@freebsd.org> <52541202.3010707@mu.org> <20131008.170444.74714516.sthaug@nethelp.no> <525422B6.9040906@mu.org> <CAJ-Vmonj4Vs35ZCE0%2B=cvyR9ZYgu%2B%2BWo0c6EmqtD=dmHLeCe2A@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1310081527250.1964@wawanesa.iciti.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 10/9/13 4:38 AM, Graham Todd wrote: > > On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Adrian Chadd wrote: > >> I think that's great. But, as we are increasingly finding, theres >> no stable >> ports snapshot, so unless we as a project change how packages are >> managed, >> there may not really be a stable, predictable version of things once >> they're moved from base to a package. A number of users and >> companies like >> that there is a very strict definition of base and that it wont >> change as >> the ports tree changes. >> >> Eg, you install 10.0 and get the rcs package from that. You then do an >> install of 10.0 a yeat later and install rcs. If it comes from the >> 10-stable pkgng set, itll pick up the latest version, not the 10.0 >> version. >> Thats the big ports vs base difference. > > Perhaps a perl style "dual life module" set of "core" (errm BASE?) > packages/ports will emerge. It could resolve some of the perennial > "what is BASE"? debates - or at least make it possible to have those > debates in a different way :-) > > My understanding is that dealing with the GPLv3 issue for BASE is > *necessary* for the project. Since the latest rcs releases are > licensed using GPLv3, FreeBSD's BASE rcs (GPLv2) would have to be > maintained exclusively by the FreeBSD project - which means more > developer overhead (the same could be said for gcc I suppose). That > seems to be a different type of issue than the size/completeness of > BASE itself. but RCS is not GPLv3 and what we have works fine... just leave it alone! > > Since rcs is a small utility, it's hooked into a script or two via > rc.subr, it's useful to a lot of folks, it doesn't face the network > and there's a BSD licensed equivalent sort of available, then maybe > the best way to go would be to import opencvs's rcs (which is not > part in the ports version of opencvs) to replace the GNU version. > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?52555B49.1070207>