From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 10 00:03:37 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47FE7106567D for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2012 00:03:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from erichfreebsdlist@ovitrap.com) Received: from alogreentechnologies.com (alogreentechnologies.com [67.212.224.110]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E13AA8FC24 for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2012 00:03:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from X220.ovitrap.com ([122.129.201.5]) (authenticated bits=0) by alogreentechnologies.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id q8A03W1t013807; Sun, 9 Sep 2012 18:03:34 -0600 Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 07:03:31 +0700 From: Erich Dollansky To: Eitan Adler Message-ID: <20120910070331.3fe2900c@X220.ovitrap.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20120908234659.GA10489@server.rulingia.com> <504BD9B5.20001@shatow.net> <504BE020.1070300@FreeBSD.org> <504BE12A.50907@shatow.net> <9A528A3C-40F1-4599-ACAB-EF306033A4F2@bsdimp.com> <86pq5vtj42.fsf@ds4.des.no> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.0 (GTK+ 2.24.6; amd64-portbld-freebsd10.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" , arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Removing CVS from HEAD X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 00:03:37 -0000 Hi, On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 12:57:48 -0400 Eitan Adler wrote: > On 9 September 2012 12:30, Bjoern A. Zeeb > wrote: > > On Sun, 9 Sep 2012, Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav wrote: > > > >> We had cvs in base because we used it. We no longer do. > > > > > > We still do until about 2015 when FreeBSD 8 is expected to end > > (depending on 8.4 to happen and when). >=20 > We are only discussing remove CVS from HEAD. It does not affect the > stable branches (as I do not intend to MFC the removal). >=20 >=20 >=20 you ignore here the problem the typical user will face when upgrading. Removing a basic component should work the other way around. It should stay in the base system as long as there are servers out there supporting it. Then the infrastructure for the new system must be put into place. When the infrastructure for the new system is up and running, the infrastructure for the old system can be taken down. It is nothing more than the story of the chicken and the egg. Erich