Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 13:53:51 -0700 From: Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com> To: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> Cc: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, arch@freebsd.org, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Fallout from the CVS discussion Message-ID: <68E67617-A497-48FB-9B63-1AAC06BD60DA@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAF6rxgn3Tmt=YRjsrK0eCb9b0wPw=uH8nKTs2Th8ZjS9zO84%2Bg@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAF6rxg=qVUHe7tc9_AXgRdUtkoHOrixwNw-GsN7C7_r0FR990A@mail.gmail.com> <20120916053523.GJ37286@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <CAF6rxg=mm9OeVDX-dYC=FwnAZ-6pGjcRad=Gm9-mLx3QiPtqVQ@mail.gmail.com> <51B48339-D1FA-49CD-B582-1C58855B024E@bsdimp.com> <CAJ-Vmo=BBgP4_eVXw7LxiFsdj2wSpAMGy4gzZybb=EiHqPFYXg@mail.gmail.com> <CAF6rxgn3Tmt=YRjsrK0eCb9b0wPw=uH8nKTs2Th8ZjS9zO84%2Bg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sep 16, 2012, at 1:07 PM, Eitan Adler wrote: > On 16 September 2012 15:53, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> wrote: >=20 >> * I'd like to first see a roadmap for doing this - eg, "we're adding = a >> NO_CVS option; CVS will become a port, you can migrate to the CVS = port >> with your next build/installworld"; >=20 > We have WITHOUT_CVS . >=20 >> * if you're that way inclined, backport the NO_CVS option (if it >> doesn't exist) to -9; >=20 > Already done. >=20 >> * Ensure all of the stuff that uses CVS is migrated beforehand, and >> publish all of that effort somewhere; >=20 > This is part of my plan. >=20 >> * Make sure you're doing it for reasons that aren't coming across as >> "GPL free! at all costs!" >=20 > This has nothing to do with the reasons I proposed to remove CVS. > Please re-read my original email. The first words were "CVS is > obsolete." > I had *no idea* CVS was GPLed until the thread started (I thought were > using a BSD licensed one). >=20 >> Now, to stir up trouble, I hereby suggest that if you're going to >> remove CVS because it's no longer used for FreeBSD's project stuff, = we >> should obviously import subversion into the base because _it_ is = being >> used for the FreeBSD project stuff. >=20 > Please re-read the original thread. I am removing CVS because it is > obsolete. CVS being used for FreeBSD project was merely a key blocker > to its removal. >=20 >> Think of why you're not doing that >> (likely because it's already a port/package and there's just as much >> inertia to introduce something to the base system as there is = removing >> it and making it a port) and see if that helps refocus your reasons >> for and against doing things. >=20 > I am not proposing introducing subversion into base because I am not > willing to do the work to maintain it. If I were, that would be a > different story (imho, the base should have sufficient software to > download and compile itself). 1. Subversion changes too much to be in base (its release cycle is = shorter than bind). 2. Subversion sometimes breaks between major/minor versions (1.6->1.7 = comes to mind) and is not backwards compatible in many cases (again, 1.6 = -> 1.7 transition). 3. It requires apr (which optionally requires gdbm), BDB 4.x (which is = GPLv2/GPLv3), sqlite3 (which pulls in tcl because of the distfile the = sqlite3 maintainer chooses to use), neon or serf, etc (point is the = dependency list is not short and thus maintainer overhead is = considerably higher). Please leave it in packages/ports. With pkg_install/pkgng, installing = subversion from a package is trivial and that should be the route taken = for developers, as opposed to having a copy in base. Thanks, -Garrett=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?68E67617-A497-48FB-9B63-1AAC06BD60DA>