On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 07:13:51PM -0700, Mike Swanson wrote: > Paul M wrote: >> On 23/06/2009, at 6:44 AM, Fernando Quintero wrote: >> >>> Hello list, >>> >>> I have a question: >>> >>> I was reading about version control systems and i found a lot of the >>> distributed software "with best performance", but really i don't know >>> much >>> about it. >>> There are some technicals or philosophicals reasons why the OpenBSD >>> repository does not change to something other than CVS? >> >> >> You seem to make the assumption that _everything_ else is better than >> CVS. >> This may be your opinion, but that's all it is. >> >> >> paulm >> > Well, I suppose it is better than RCS or SCCS, and in some small ways, > CVS even did things right that SVN gets wrong (namely, tags). But to > imply that CVS is better than (or equal to) Mercurial or Git is a bit > ridiculous :) >
Well the OpenBSD devs have only read completely the source of CVS, and developed OpenCVS, so (i think) that they don't want to use another thing that they don't fully understand, and isn't BSD/ISC licensed (like mercurial or git). well that's my guess. also: read the archives, this has been discuted sometimes. -- DISCLAIMER: http://goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/ This message will self-destruct in 3 seconds.
