From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 3 08:20:23 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: arch@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6340116A420 for ; Fri, 3 Mar 2006 08:20:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from xdivac02@stud.fit.vutbr.cz) Received: from eva.fit.vutbr.cz (eva.fit.vutbr.cz [147.229.10.14]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 581A743D49 for ; Fri, 3 Mar 2006 08:20:21 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from xdivac02@stud.fit.vutbr.cz) Received: from eva.fit.vutbr.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eva.fit.vutbr.cz (envelope-from xdivac02@eva.fit.vutbr.cz) (8.13.4/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k238KHij017838 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 3 Mar 2006 09:20:17 +0100 (CET) Received: (from xdivac02@localhost) by eva.fit.vutbr.cz (8.13.4/8.13.3/Submit) id k238KH7Z017837 for arch@freebsd.org; Fri, 3 Mar 2006 09:20:17 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 09:20:17 +0100 From: Divacky Roman To: arch@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20060303082016.GA17730@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> References: <20060302155625.37140.qmail@web32714.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20060302160958.GA2035@flame.pc> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060302160958.GA2035@flame.pc> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.49 on 147.229.10.14 Cc: Subject: Re: Subversion? (Re: HEADS UP: Importing csup into base) 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: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 08:20:23 -0000 On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 06:09:58PM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > On 2006-03-02 16:56, pfgshield-freebsd@yahoo.com wrote: > > Hi; > > > > I'm not wanting to be rude or anything, but is the idea of > > moving to subversion at some point in time completely dead, or > > is csup going to interact with it somehow? > > ``Moving to Subversion'' is not really with us right now. On the > other hand, csup and CVS are with us today, and are ready to use. > I don't see why using or developing csup inhibits a potential > future move to Subversion, if that's what you are asking. I think that Robert Ollivier strongly suggested using mercurial as our (possibly) next vcs, so if any move from cvs then to mercurial..