Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 15:23:19 +0100 From: Claude Buisson <clbuisson@orange.fr> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CVS removal from the base Message-ID: <4EDCD3D7.4040501@orange.fr> In-Reply-To: <CAFHbX1%2BXj6DoT6uxzo-q4g=2gVKx7_uR5NQwYpAE99EzVFrT8A@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAJ-VmonQQ-yHrDox35gpuaXXYV5j%2BUXOJH5jr93m3j=uBgbkWA@mail.gmail.com> <4ED974A2.7080606@FreeBSD.org> <4ED9EA27.8090206@inse.ru> <20111203.140334.74707074.sthaug@nethelp.no> <CADe0-4m-p4umXQst%2Bb8DGFcUnct9P6PQCjQd5HXc3YPmNevCSw@mail.gmail.com> <CAFHbX1%2BXj6DoT6uxzo-q4g=2gVKx7_uR5NQwYpAE99EzVFrT8A@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Replying to a "random" message in this thread On 12/05/2011 13:49, Tom Evans wrote: > On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Max Khon<fjoe@samodelkin.net> wrote: >> CVS != csup. >> >> I wonder how many people will express their sentiments about CVS when >> they really mean cvsup/csup. > > I wasn't going to jump onto this bikeshed, as CVS will not be going > anywhere any time soon, I am sure. > > I use cvs, rather than csup. I use cvsup to fetch CVS archives to > /home/ncvs, and check out ports from there, as described in > development(7). > > If ports were no longer delivered via CVS, you may have had a point > about removing CVS from base - but they are not. > > In my mind, a first step would be to move ports to subversion, > initially using svn->cvs bridge. > Once done, the next step would be to change all infrastructure scripts > so that they can build from/be driven by subversion. > > After that, nothing in base would use cvs for any purpose, and at that > point I would be happy for it to be dropped from base - but only if it > was replaced by subversion. I think it is important that with a base > install of FreeBSD you can check out and update the source and rebuild > itself. > > Cheers > > Tom 1. I wonder why nobody has raised the point of the existence of numerous cvs/cvsup mirrors for FreeBSD. Do you want all of them to migrate to subversion ? have you asked their opinion about it ? are you prepared to an increased load on fewer servers if they do not migrate ? or are you thinking that this is a non problem because the declining number of users as FreeBSD become a system "for the developpers by the developpers and only the developpers" ? 2. All these talks about moving things from base to ports / spliting base / creating a new kind of ports miss the point that things must be maintained on an increasing number of branches: with the new 9.0 release there will be 3 stable branches (7.X, 8.X, 9.X), and with the foolish rush to create new major releases this will be ever increasing. But perhaps the real intent is to drop support of some parts of the system before officially stopping the support of a base branch ? 3. Some months ago dougb@ sent a message on a list with the lietmotiv "change is difficult". I wonder if he thought about the fact that could be the main reason why people stick to FreeBSD instead of migrating to another more fashionable system. Ordinary users also are volunteers, and in my work experience, using FreeBSD may be a day by day political fight. 4. Do not piss users off by making changes for the sake of it. Do not use your energy to destroy things rather that making things work (but it is easier to destroy that to build). Do not try to impose your view about the use of the system (someone wrote "FreeBSD is about tools and not about policies" and that must be preserved). I stop here, this message becoming too long and off topic. But I needed to write it in view of the current (sad) evolution of this system /community. Claude Buisson FreeBSD user since 1995
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4EDCD3D7.4040501>