Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2013 13:37:04 -0700 From: Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@komquats.com> To: Jos Backus <jos@catnook.com> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon@orthanc.ca> Subject: Re: rcs Message-ID: <201310082037.r98Kb4JA058190@slippy.cwsent.com> In-Reply-To: Message from Jos Backus <jos@catnook.com> of "Tue, 08 Oct 2013 08:49:21 -0700." <CAETOPp0imH3LCM2gwe1a_TJD%2Bq5YoWhuJbR0YhHpux0qe8irtA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <CAETOPp0imH3LCM2gwe1a_TJD+q5YoWhuJbR0YhHpux0qe8irtA@mail.gmail.c om> , Jos Backus writes: > On Oct 7, 2013 7:31 PM, "Lyndon Nerenberg" <lyndon@orthanc.ca> 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. > > Perhaps slightly off-topic, but how about we move into the 21st century and > import the 2-clause BSD-licensed Fossil? > > http://www.fossil-scm.org/ > > Not RCS, I know, but vastly more useful. Bikeshed alert. Let's not let this discussion go sideways. Seriously, it's not the same. To import something different doesn't replace what was removed. We have two options. Put it back, or something like it, e.g. OpenRCS, back, or put it in ports. Personally I don't think it matters where it lives as long as the same functionality is there. -- Cheers, Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@komquats.com> FreeBSD UNIX: <cy@FreeBSD.org> Web: http://www.FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201310082037.r98Kb4JA058190>