On 10/8/13 12:34 PM, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Julian Elischer <jul...@freebsd.org
<mailto:jul...@freebsd.org>> wrote:
On 10/8/13 9:33 AM, Steve Kargl wrote:
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:41:38PM -0400, George Mitchell wrote:
On 10/07/13 20:28, John-Mark Gurney wrote:
Julian Elischer wrote this message on Tue, Oct 08,
2013 at 08:01 +0800:
not a big thing but I believe that a lot of
poeple use ci/co on /etc
becasue it is "just there"
+1
Folks, this is just plain a major violation of the
Principle of Least
Amazement. RCS is ideal for keeping track of my
configuration files
in /etc. What do we gain by removing it?
Less GPL code in FreeBSD?
not a problem unless you plan in shipping a changed version of
it on your product??
Most new versions of GPL licensed code are converted to Version 3 GPL .
This is blocking FreeBSD if they keep GPL licensed code in base ,
because commercial companies usingFreeBSD are not able to use
FreeBSD any more if the FreeBSD switches to Version 3 GPL .
This obstacle is in the base system GCC : It stayed in an older
version , and necessitated to switch to Clang/LLVM .
Difficulty of such a switch is apparenly known .
Therefore cleaning base from GPL licensed code is a vital
requirement for further progress WITH RESPECT TO FreeBSD Project
structure .
Thank you very much .
sure but lets keep the one one in the the tree untill there is a
replacement ready to commit. ro 10 will have NO RCS which is a POLA.
Mehmet Erol Sanliturk
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
