I think there was a page on openbsd.org about why CVS, but it was removed. I think someone should restore it ;)
> It works well for OpenBSD and has it has been for 29 years. There is no > point in evangelizing on git, hg, or any other version control system. > CVS works well for the use case here and if it's not broken, don't fix > it. If they had gotten on all the VCS bandwagons over the years, the > repo would have gone from CVS to SVN to Mercurial to Git by now. FreeBSD > went from CVS to SVN to Git over that same time and have had many > headaches over the years during those transitions and keeping version > control history sane. > > Whenever people scream about wanting to change version control systems, > they forget all the tooling and process that is built around it. > Changing that isn't cheap or quick. > > I've worked on projects that have kept very old version control systems > running because all of the tooling was built around it. I've seen > programs run for 20+ years on CMVC (just when it had been EOLed, they > eventually moved to git) and PVCS/Dimensions. The Dimensions people are > staying on that because it would cost too much money to port all of > their productivity aids and other utilities to git. That money would be > spent elsewhere on delivering actual code rather than rearranging the > furniture because someone wanted to put their mark on the project. > Simply put, if it works, it works. No need to change it. > > Nobody is interested in your opinions about version control. > -Andy Wallis >
