Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
> the perl-qa people have some code they need to manage in a repository of
> some kind. For now I have directed them to SourceForge, but I have a 100
> users license for perforce I got for perl, so if we can get a quick
> consensus that we might want to make a perl6 code infrastructure around
> perforce then I'll go ahead and set it up.
I would like to vote against perforce, because it is not free (as in
freedom) software, and CVS is.
I don't think it's a good idea to build Perl6 development infrastructure
around non-free software.
On a personal note, I would not be able to participate in Perl6 development
if doing so required that I use perforce, because I have personal ethical
beliefs that prohibit me from using free software. I may not be the only
one.
I realize that perforce has possible technical benefits, but I think it's
better to (a) stick with CVS or (b) wait for Simon's perforce-on-CVS hack or
(c) start with CVS, and add Simon's hack when it's available.
--
Bradley M. Kuhn - http://www.ebb.org/bkuhn
PGP signature
