Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 09:41:29 +0700 From: Erich Dollansky <erichfreebsdlist@ovitrap.com> To: Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Removing CVS from HEAD Message-ID: <20120910094129.56fea061@X220.ovitrap.com> In-Reply-To: <504D4C76.6080205@FreeBSD.org> References: <CAF6rxgnZGjzm230sZXVXxmE7wPowF_BZqbwRjdvz8oV-03gS=A@mail.gmail.com> <20120908234659.GA10489@server.rulingia.com> <504BD9B5.20001@shatow.net> <504BE020.1070300@FreeBSD.org> <504BE12A.50907@shatow.net> <9A528A3C-40F1-4599-ACAB-EF306033A4F2@bsdimp.com> <86pq5vtj42.fsf@ds4.des.no> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1209091628400.13080@ai.fobar.qr> <20120910065532.3f029c4b@X220.ovitrap.com> <504D2DCD.8030508@FreeBSD.org> <20120910075241.3994a95e@X220.ovitrap.com> <504D4C76.6080205@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, On Sun, 09 Sep 2012 19:12:06 -0700 Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 9/9/2012 5:52 PM, Erich Dollansky wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Sun, 09 Sep 2012 17:01:17 -0700 > > Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > > > >> On 9/9/2012 4:55 PM, Erich Dollansky wrote: > >>> I would suggest to keep it in the system and announce its end when > >>> older system like 8.x or 9.x are at the end of their life time. > >> > >> I think you misunderstand the proposal. No one is suggesting > >> removing CVS from FreeBSD 7, 8, or 9. It will _only_ be removed > >> from what is now HEAD, which will eventually be 10.0-RELEASE. > >> > > this is how I understand it. The problem I see is from the end-user > > perspective. They will upgrade to 10 and suddenly everything they > > developed stops working. > > You keep conveniently removing the parts of my posts where I point out > that CVS is now, and will remain, available from ports for those > users. And in the next few years there will be, as there already have > been; numerous announcements about the value of moving to subversion, > new mirrors, etc. > I also took out the part from others and myself where we said that there are systems running without ports installed on them. > > I would suggest to start from the infrastructure side by getting > > more mirrors for the new system while phasing the mirrors for the > > old system out. > > That's already in play, and will continue to improve in the years > before we even have a 10.0-RELEASE, never mind before it gets wide > adoption. I fully agree with this. > > > Users are then not forced to make the sudden change. > > They won't be. > > > Please do not tell me that they should read UPDATING. They only will > > after they ran into trouble. > > If they miss all the memos about moving to subversion, that won't be > our fault. :) > Of course not. It is just how it is done. > > The moment you take out the knob off you also take out all CVS > > mirros. > > This is quite simply untrue. > This is the point where the developers (I also was one) forget psychology. Technically it is untrue, practically it is not. As I said, people will read UPDATING after they ran into problems. I see it this way. Nothing will break as long as you leave it there. You mark it depreciated, you mark it unsupported, you mark it whatever but leave it there. Normal users might run into problems over time as it is not supported anymore. They can then switch softly to subversion. When you remove it when the infrastructure is really there, you will not get a single complaint. Erich
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120910094129.56fea061>