From: Warren Toomey <wkt@cs.adfa.edu.au>
Message-Id: <200001060945.UAA35060@henry.cs.adfa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: CVS Repository for UNIX
In-Reply-To: <200001060909.UAA48145@minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au> from "norman@nose.cita.utoronto.ca" at "Jan 6, 2000  4: 8:52 am"
To: pups@minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au (Unix Heritage Society)
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 20:45:17 +1100 (EST)
Reply-To: wkt@cs.adfa.edu.au
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-pups@minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au
Precedence: bulk

In article by norman@nose.cita.utoronto.ca:
> I would argue strongly that the archive should contain absolutely pure
> copies of any historic objects, whether they were proper distributions
> or just snapshots like most of the older boot images.  It's important
> to preserve accurate, unbowdlerized history; that is part of what we
> should be doing.

I agree completely.
 
> Even using a CVS repository somehow doesn't feel kosher to me, though
> that is probably silly as long as it is possible (and clear how) to
> extract the unimproved original, and as long as the very original
> distribution or dump tape or whatnot is kept around too so that future
> archaeologists have the right thing to study.

With CVS you can tag releases, and so you can extract back from a known
release. You can have branches at various points too, and also merge
branches. However, it really needs a CVS guru to make it work properly.
And, of course, when we get to BSD, we should bring the existing
SCCS deltas into the CVS tree, too.

The CVS idea can be someone else's project :-)
 
	Warren