Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 22:15:49 +0100 From: Ceri Davies <ceri@submonkey.net> To: "pobox@verysmall.org" <pobox@verysmall.org> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs Message-ID: <20061023211549.GB30631@submonkey.net> In-Reply-To: <4538F586.20705@verysmall.org> References: <4538B2AF.3080006@verysmall.org> <20061020142207.GA6298@gothmog.pc> <4538F586.20705@verysmall.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--CUfgB8w4ZwR/yMy5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 06:12:54PM +0200, pobox@verysmall.org wrote:
> Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> >You're wrong. It's the other way around:
> >
> > We are *forced* to use CVSup, because CVS is centralized, without
> > any other good way to mirror changesets to a distributed network of
> > mirrors, users and developer workspaces.
> >
> >On the other hand, SVN is centralized too :-)
>=20
> What I wanted to say is that FreeBSD will remain for the time being, on=
=20
> cvs - is that correct?
Until we're happy with another tool and have reasons that make moving
worth the effort, we'll stay with CVS.
This is /not/ because of the CVSup infrastructue though, which is
essentially good at throwing arbitrary filesets around and doesn't tie
us to CVS.
Ceri
--=20
That must be wonderful! I don't understand it at all.
-- Moliere
--CUfgB8w4ZwR/yMy5
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQFFPTEFocfcwTS3JF8RAgqOAJ96gF3Cs4qDI7l8gUAgZkG70hxP2gCgo1cz
NvuJPvDz6yHPtOo+ss75rTU=
=yjDZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--CUfgB8w4ZwR/yMy5--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061023211549.GB30631>