From owner-cvs-games  Fri Sep 29 01:25:02 1995
Return-Path: owner-cvs-games
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id BAA03261
          for cvs-games-outgoing; Fri, 29 Sep 1995 01:25:02 -0700
Received: from silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU [136.152.64.181])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id BAA03247
          ; Fri, 29 Sep 1995 01:24:45 -0700
Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (8.6.12/8.6.9) id BAA00743; Fri, 29 Sep 1995 01:24:38 -0700
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 1995 01:24:38 -0700
Message-Id: <199509290824.BAA00743@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>
To: phk@critter.tfs.com
CC: mark@grondar.za, CVS-commiters@freefall.freebsd.org,
        cvs-games@freefall.freebsd.org
In-reply-to: <272.812107080@critter.tfs.com> (message from Poul-Henning Kamp on Tue, 26 Sep 1995 10:18:00 +0100)
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/games/x11/xneko xneko.c
From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
Sender: owner-cvs-games@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

 * > I'm not sure what this is going to buy us.  How are we going to
 * > maintain the original bits that gets pulled into them?  Another cvs
 * > tree? :)
 * 
 * I'ts going to buy us CVS control over the sources..

Ok, another question: then what will it gain us compared to it living
in /usr/src?  The main objective to move things out to ports is to
"unbloat" the cvs tree, it seems to me that if we keep it under cvs
control on another tree, it's just unbloating one tree and bloating
another...(^_^;)....

Satoshi