Subject: Re: Any point to cvs using rsh? (was Re: Anoncvs pointer)
To: None <email@example.com>
From: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/13/2002 09:03:20
At Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:22:01 +0000 (UTC), "Perry E. Metzger" wrote:
> I know of a couple of people still using rsh, but only a couple. I
> cannot recall the last time I used it myself, and I'm hardly the only
> person in that position.
Uh, then why not do the right thing, and convince the maintainers of
CVS to take back such a change?
Why should we be different than the standard software? Difference to
be better-for-you is still difference... and there do exist some
people who find consistency w/ standard tools behaviour desirable.
I don't see why we should have _any_ modifications to the actual CVS
sources in the NetBSD source tree, at all.
I maintain a personal copy of 'cvs' based on the master sources with
some mods, because ... yes, that's right, I've made some changes which
were better-for-me (and, of course, I think better in the absolute),
but which were rejected for inclusion in the master CVS sources.
Does that mean that i should get NetBSD to put them into the NetBSD