From owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 28 01:25:32 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A949FE39 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 01:25:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@chthonixia.net) Received: from www5.pairlite.com (www5.pairlite.com [64.130.10.15]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8783FFB9 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 01:25:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from whisperer.chthonixia.net (unknown [184.152.30.105]) by www5.pairlite.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A96862E2DB for ; Sun, 27 Jan 2013 20:25:29 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 20:26:16 -0500 From: Joe Altman To: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: removing CVS in Handbook Updating and Upgrading chapter Message-ID: <20130128012616.GA6831@whisperer.chthonixia.net> References: <1359241802-3572135.75152325.fr0QN9mrI032137@rs149.luxsci.com> <1359270722-3962523.11114096.fr0R7BNq4003267@rs149.luxsci.com> <20130127072036.GL1423@glenbarber.us> <1359272102-5757022.21162222.fr0R7YAiH011169@rs149.luxsci.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Documentation project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 01:25:32 -0000 On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 01:15:52PM -0700, Warren Block wrote: > > Say we leave CVS references in this chapter, and CVS for source goes > away in (for example) six months. Anyone who starts using CVS in that > time will be forced to switch. And they would be justifiably upset, > because they were offered an option that was going away. As a user, not a developer nor a contributor, I agree. Don't send anyone down the wrong path. There is just no reason for that. > My personal feeling is that continuing to suggest CVS for -STABLE or > -CURRENT, even with a deprecation warning, is a disservice to those > users. Yep. And though I cannot find it now, I would have sworn blind that there was an EOL in the handbook. Sometime in February this year? As a user, I urge that the doc team not leave this hanging. If the project does not intend to support it, then bite the bullet now not later. Joe