Den mån 22 juli 2019 kl 17:05 skrev Австин Ким <[email protected]>:
> Hi, > > As someone completely new to OpenBSD the one immediate first impression > that most peculiarly sticks out like a sore thumb to me is the Project’s > use of CVS for source code management. I am curious why the Project > continues to use CVS and/or if developers have in the past considered > migrating the codebase to a distributed SCM system like Mercurial which > IMHO might make branching and merging easier on developers, especially more > recent developers coming out of universities. Is it because the Project > prefers using a centralized versus distributed SCM system? Or is it just > because that’s just the way it has always been done and why change that? > And would migration to something like hg be a possibility in the future > that might possibly lower the psychological barrier of entry for newer > developers? (And btw this is meant as a sincere question with no intention > to start a contentious debate; really just asking out of curiosity because > seeing CVS diffs in the mailing lists was what visually jumped out most > prominently to me for the first time; I’m sure after spending more time > with OpenBSD it could be something I could just get used to.) > Thanks for all the wonderful responses to my previous post which really > helped me gain a better understanding of the Project! > As Nick Holland wrote here on the same topic: https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=136724343006024&w=2 the last quote is kind of telling it all: --- Want to sell OpenBSD on an alternative? Find a product that was really crappy, switched development tools, and suddenly started rivaling OpenBSD for quality for no reason other than the switch of development tools. --- -- May the most significant bit of your life be positive.
