DragonFly kernel List (threaded) for 2008-08
Re: RCS Discussion
On Fri, August 8, 2008 14:56, Erik Wikström wrote:
>>> This would mean anonymous access and having the utility as part of
>>> base. There may be a better strategy; I'm thinking in terms of the
>>> functionality we use now with CVS and cvsup.
>> I absolutely do not think that the tool has to be part of base. cvsup
>> is not part of base either. An existing pkgsrc binary package on the
>> iso shoud suffice.
> If you want normal users to be able to pull patches from some "official
> private repo" the RCS would have to be in base. Or the repo would be able
> to generate the patches so they were downloadable via HTTP/FTP (but then
> again it would probably require steps like backing out one patch and then
> applying a new).
*Why* does this require the tool to be in base? Having it in pkgsrc and
having it pre-installed on isos/installations seems like a good fit as