From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 8 20:50:19 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DF23700 for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 20:50:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from deischen@freebsd.org) Received: from mail.netplex.net (mail.netplex.net [204.213.176.9]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C27572FFD for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 20:50:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from sea.ntplx.net (sea.ntplx.net [204.213.176.11]) by mail.netplex.net (8.14.6/8.14.6/NETPLEX) with ESMTP id r98Khm9H046465; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 16:43:48 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS and Clam AntiVirus (mail.netplex.net) X-Greylist: Message whitelisted by DRAC access database, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.1 (mail.netplex.net [204.213.176.9]); Tue, 08 Oct 2013 16:43:48 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 16:43:48 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Eischen X-X-Sender: eischen@sea.ntplx.net To: Cy Schubert Subject: Re: [Heads Up] RCS removed from base In-Reply-To: <201310082033.r98KXUgJ058127@slippy.cwsent.com> Message-ID: References: <201310082033.r98KXUgJ058127@slippy.cwsent.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Kurt Lidl X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: Daniel Eischen List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2013 20:50:19 -0000 On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Cy Schubert wrote: > > I've started work on a port (not that this was my highest priority but > received a private email that I may want to do this instead of rcs57). > Would the majority here rather have it in base? Just finished schlepping > the OpenBSD source to my laptop (the link to the OpenRCS site returns a TCP > RST). I don't mind either way. It's the groups's and the Project's call. It seems to have ben taken out without much discussion, and we're in the process of releasing 10.0, so I'd say put it back in base. After 10.0 goes out (or is branched), then we can have a proper discussion about how to remove it and what, if any, to replace it with. -- DE