Distributed Version Control for ports(7) ( was: Re: autoconf
itetcu at FreeBSD.org
Wed Sep 22 16:29:43 UTC 2010
On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 19:07:17 -0700
perryh at pluto.rain.com wrote:
> Janne Snabb <snabb at epipe.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 20 Sep 2010, perryh at pluto.rain.com wrote:
> > > One issue with either Git or Mercurial is that they are GPL.
> > > AFAIK FreeBSD prefers to avoid GPL in the base or in critical
> > > widely-used infrastructure if a viable non-GPL alternative
> > > exists.
> > The project currently uses Perforce for many sub-projects,
> > so using GPL licenced solution could hardly be a problem.
> According to the "General Information" table here:
> Perforce is not GPL -- it is proprietary (but "Free ... for OSS
> development"). Thus the fact that FreeBSD currently uses Perforce
> tells us nothing about the acceptability of a GPL licensed solution.
> (Ditto for SVN, which -- as someone already pointed out -- is not
> GPL either.)
> There are two distributed, BSD-licensed VCS listed on that page:
> Codeville and Fossil. Both are in ports, but Codeville has been
> proposed for removal as it seems no longer to be under active
> development. That leaves Fossil as a possibly-viable BSD-licensed
> alternative to Mercurial. (Of course, there may be others that
> aren't listed on that particular Wikipedia page.)
Keeping the original recipients when replying (all of them not only
To:) would be greatly appreciated (and it's required by the list
IOnut - Un^d^dregistered ;) FreeBSD "user"
"Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect"
FreeBSD committer -> itetcu at FreeBSD.org, PGP Key ID 057E9F8B493A297B
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20100922/5d8ed34a/signature.pgp
More information about the freebsd-ports