On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 02:05:17PM +0000, Alexander Best wrote: > On Tue Jan 25 11, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > > On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 02:22:34 -0800, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: > > >Diane Bruce <d...@db.net> wrote: > > >> There certainly would not be a chance of putting mercurial or git > > >> into base for example. ... > > no longer the case for the subversion repo of src/. IMO this hasn't > > really caused any major problem with the people who want to check out > > and patch the source tree.
Note I never said it should be importable into base. > also i think freebsd should stick to a major VCS, like git and not some lesser Argumentum ad populum. If the VCS is 1) easy to use 2) easy to maintain and has a body of people working on it already 3) can import other VCS formats, then why not? Also note that using an appeal to popularity suggests we should go with the flow and stop working on llvm/clang. Afer all, everyone else uses gcc. As it happens, fossil is quite tiny, fairly feature rich, BSDL'd and in active development. QED All that being said, I am not interested in bikeshedding right now. Those who will look at the alternatives intelligently should do so. > cheers. > alex - Diane -- - d...@freebsd.org d...@db.net http://www.db.net/~db _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
