Does / Is anyone maintaining CVS for FreeBSD?

[Erich Dollansky]

Hi,

On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 17:02:11 +0100
Matthias Andree <mandree at FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> Am 02.01.2013 06:31, schrieb Erich Dollansky:
> > Hi,
> > 
> >> Thank God! I'd hate to think that after unwinding years accumulated
> >> CVS process, to rewind it for SVN, only to have to do it again for
> >> GIT, just seems a bit masochistic.
> > 
> > do not worry. It will come.
> > 
> > Seriously, I do not understand many changes especially when there
> > is a system in place which does not affect a running system at all
> > but things inside the OS still could be improved. 
> 
> The migration was made in order to get "things inside the OS ...
> improved" at all.  Developers were fed up wasting too much time
> struggling with CVS itself rather than working on "the things inside
> the OS".

I hightly doubt that the efforts spent now are worth this.

It would have been so much easier and smoother to make the change with
10.0.

A normal user does not expect any changes of this kind in a x.1 release.

But it also makes one other problem obvious. The ports tree has no
version numbers. So, even if the switch would have been made with the
10.0 release, it would have been the same problem for the ports tree.

Even today, the handbook states only two sites for SVN and a long list
for CVS. Wouldn't it have been a bit more practical to build the
infrastructure first and then pull the plug?

What will happen to the two SVN servers when no others come up soon?

Is the user base so small that two servers are able to handle the
traffic?
 
Erich