Removing CVS from HEAD

[Warner Losh]

On Sep 9, 2012, at 11:39 PM, Doug Barton wrote:

> On 9/9/2012 9:01 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
>> 
>> On Sep 9, 2012, at 6:53 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
>>> We have a long way to go until 10-RELEASE, and a long uptake cycle after
>>> that. By the time even a significant percentage of our users are
>>> actually using 10.something the momentum will have shifted entirely to
>>> SVN. ... and anyone using 10 who needs CVS can install it from ports.
>> 
>> I'll point out that "what things should be like at 10.0" is difficult to predict today.  Saying the project will be a particular way weakens the argument given the project's glorious history on such pronouncements...  It is a great goal, but I'd rather see more concrete progress towards the goal before pulling the trigger.
> 
> Oddly, the opposite argument was put forth for removing sysinstall in
> HEAD when there was no replacement available for the post-install
> features of sysinstall. The fact that it got removed anyway helped spur
> action regarding its replacement.

And we've had plenty of friction in that transition, so it would seem the evidence supports the go a little more slowly approach.  But, sysinstall is kinda a special case, so I don't think either side can draw much useful inference from that debate.

> The balls are already rolling towards getting SVN mirrors in place, and
> anyone who still needs CVS years from now can install it from ports.

True.  And delaying a bit until things are more jelled won't hurt anything either.  If all goes according to plan, this will be in a few months.  If it doesn't, then we have a fallback...

Warner