From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 8 21:20:09 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5218916A4CE for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2004 21:20:09 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp003.bizmail.yahoo.com (smtp003.bizmail.yahoo.com [216.136.130.195]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0F70243D1D for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2004 21:20:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from noackjr@alumni.rice.edu) Received: from unknown (HELO optimator.noacks.org) (noackjr@supercrime.org@70.240.179.20 with login) by smtp003.bizmail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 8 Jul 2004 21:20:08 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimator.noacks.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E90761E1; Thu, 8 Jul 2004 16:20:08 -0500 (CDT) Received: from optimator.noacks.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (optimator.noacks.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 45026-02; Thu, 8 Jul 2004 16:20:06 -0500 (CDT) Received: from compgeek.noacks.org (compgeek [192.168.1.10]) by optimator.noacks.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADB54618F; Thu, 8 Jul 2004 16:20:06 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by compgeek.noacks.org (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i68LK594017980; Thu, 8 Jul 2004 16:20:06 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from noackjr@alumni.rice.edu) Message-ID: <40EDBA85.3020801@alumni.rice.edu> Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 16:20:05 -0500 From: Jon Noack User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (X11/20040629) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= References: <200407062323.02854.kirk@strauser.com> <20040707043251.GA35651@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <200407062345.24117.kirk@strauser.com> <20040707070012.GC38356@dragon.nuxi.com> <40EC11EB.4060804@sympatico.ca> <20040707152149.GG82302@elvis.mu.org> <20040707160745.GA39557@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20040707224510.E18741@volatile.chemikals.org> <20040708032639.GA43737@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <40ECE8B7.4010209@alumni.rice.edu> <20040708165310.6e238a77.steve@sohara.org> <40ED9695.2000805@alumni.rice.edu> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at noacks.org cc: sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Rewrite cvsup & portupgrade in C X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: noackjr@alumni.rice.edu List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 21:20:09 -0000 On 07/08/04 15:53, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > Jon Noack writes: >> Considering we were discussing how to update to the latest source, >> which both cvs and cvsup can do, cvsup is the more advanced of the >> two. Its speed is testament to this. Granted, cvs has a whole >> host of other features and functionality, but in our limited focus >> of updating to the latest source, cvsup wins. > > Not from a developer's perspective. Yes, I know that cvsup cannot replace cvs and that cvs is more important for developers. I meant "in our limited focus of updating to the latest source" to imply what the majority of people would need cvs(up) for, namely read-only access to the latest source without the need to merge local changes (regardless of what you read on bsd.slashdot, I posit that there are far more end users of FreeBSD than there are developers). To the end user, cvsup is far and away the best choice and is more advanced for their needs. Regardless, this is all just semantics and we're wasting each other's time. This thread is too long anyway... Jon