Re: cvs better than git?

[mayuresh%kathe.in@localhost <mayuresh%kathe.in@localhost>]

On Wednesday, June 17, 2020 05:58 PM IST, Johnny Billquist <bqt%update.uu.se@localhost> wrote:

> On 2020-06-17 14:24, Mayuresh wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 02:07:46PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> >> I could go on about my objects, and the possible risks and issues, but I
> >> think if this rant isn't enough to start you thinking, I doubt any more text
> >> from me will change anything.
> >
> > Risk management is important. Given we do that, utilizing such services to
> > our benefit isn't so bad - for example as a mirror rather than primary
> > storage.
> >
> > I mean I'd not completely hold myself back from using such services, if I
> > can benefit from them, as long as I am not being critically dependent on
> > them.
>
> What is the benefit then? Now I'm being curious...
>
> I mean, if we would be having the primary repository our self, and just
> have them be a mirror. Just a simple way of adding resources? Is the 
> load of people checking the code out that big? How much can we save
> there then? Or what other benefits do you see?

do you think high-quality, performant hardware and high-volume, quality network connectivity turns out to be as low-cost as "free" (service from github)?
i second that idea of having a budget git repository on hardware owned by "the netbsd foundation" which is mirrored by github and takes care of all the load of all developers checking in/out their code.
the project could save big-time on costs, have a safe primary repository of all the code, while reaping all the benefits of a large corporation offering free high-performance services to be at the developer-facing end.