SCM options (was Re: Where is FreeBSD going?)

[Doug Rabson]

On Sun, 2004-01-11 at 00:05, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2004 at 05:01:13PM -0500, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> >At 9:35 PM +0000 1/10/04, Andrew Boothman wrote:
> >>Peter Schuller wrote:
> >>
> >>>Most of the noteworthy features of subversion are listed
> >>>on the project front page:
> >>>
> >>>   http://subversion.tigris.org/
> >>
> >>A significant one of which is the fact that it's available
> >>under a BSD-style license. Meaning that the project wouldn't
> >>have to rely on more GPLed code.
> >>
> >>I wonder if our SCM would be brought into the base system or
> >>whether it would just be left in ports?
> >
> >We haven't even started to *test* subversion yet, so I think
> >it's a bit early to worry about this question!
> 
> I disagree.  Andrew raised two issues (type of license and port vs
> base location).  The type of license is an input to the decision as
> to which SCM to choose - BSD would be preferable but GPL is probably
> acceptable (given two potential SCMs with similar features, the BSD
> licensed one would be selected in preference to the GPL one).

Subversion has a friendly BSD-ish license but it depends heavily on
Sleepycat DB which doesn't. I imagine that if we do end up using it one
day, it would be best managed as a port rather than part of the base
system. I just don't see many people agreeing on importing
subversion+db-4.2+apache2 into src/contrib...