What to do about RCS/OpenRCS

[Steve Kargl]

On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 09:12:57AM -0700, Jos Backus wrote:
>On May 11, 2015 9:10 AM, "Steve Kargl" <sgk at troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 08:43:06AM -0700, Jos Backus wrote:
>>> On May 11, 2015 2:31 AM, "Lars Engels" <lars.engels at 0x20.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, May 09, 2015 at 11:27:57AM -0700, Jos Backus wrote:
>>>>> Maybe off-topic, but functionality-wise it might make
>>>>> much more sense to import Fossil. RCS has too many limitations
>>>>> this day and age when better
>>>>> tools are available. Of course, this would require people to learn
>>>>> something new, which I know can be a challenge.
>>>>
>>>> I really like fossil. But it's still under development, so it
>>>> would soon be outdated. It's better installed from ports/packages.
>>>
>>> It seems OpenRCS is still under development ;-p It's better
>>> installed from ports/packages, too.
>>>
>>> It would give Fossil a recognition boost as a BSD-licensed DVCS.
>>>
>>
>> Please, just stop.  Thanks.
> 
> Like I said, a challenge.
> 

You've completely missed the point.  OpenRCS is intended
to replace ancient GNU RCS, which is already included in the
base system and used by a few scripts.  Fossil is not a 
drop-in replacement for the rcs utilities.  

So, please just stop.

PS: Please reply to the list not directly to me.  CC stored.

-- 
Steve