From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 9 07:43:03 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 6382E4C0 for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 07:43:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hans@beastielabs.net) Received: from mail.beastielabs.net (beasties.demon.nl [82.161.3.114]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED2B421FD for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 07:43:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merom.hotsoft.nl (merom.hotsoft.nl [192.168.0.12]) by mail.beastielabs.net (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r997K2MR047629; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 09:20:02 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from hans@beastielabs.net) Message-ID: <525503A2.50002@beastielabs.net> Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 09:20:02 +0200 From: Hans Ottevanger User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lyndon Nerenberg , "freebsd-current@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: rcs References: <77307DF8-637D-4295-BF47-8742F1552CE8@orthanc.ca> In-Reply-To: <77307DF8-637D-4295-BF47-8742F1552CE8@orthanc.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 07:43:03 -0000 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@), reminds me more of a Secret Society than of an Open Source project. Regards, Hans