On Sat, 2005-02-05 at 16:20 +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 05, 2005 at 12:53:43PM +0000, Stefan Krüger wrote:
> > may I ask why we still use cvs to distribute the source and repository 
> > files? I mean cvs may be fine for developing software, but for anything 
> > else? FreeBSD already uses cvsup (I know, it's based on modula3 and not 
> > portable) and cvsync sounds also very nice (though it still doesn't 
> > support fetching plain source files :-(). Or even rsync?!
> 
> cvs does more than distribute the sources, it also allows to
> retrive diffs between revisions, branches, commit logs, or sources from an
> arbitrary date, etc ...

But many people (non-developers) do not really care about this.  They
just want the latest stuff.

> If it's just to retrieve sources from HEAD or the
> release branches, there are sup and the weekly tar files.

We'd tell such people to use other methods rather than cvs (assuming
that's good for us, i.e., less overhead on the servers - something I
don't know).

Cheers,

-- 
Julio M. Merino Vidal <jmmv84@gmail.com>
http://www.livejournal.com/users/jmmv/
The NetBSD Project - http://www.NetBSD.org/