[AshamedCaptain]

> All of these reasons boil down to "if it ain't broke" and "that's what we're used to".

"Works for us". Which is a pretty good argument.

> The claim that "it is unlikely that any alternative versioning system would improve the developer's productivity or quality" is absolutely laughable IMO.

Why is it laughable exactly? I mean for me I can't use CVS due to the lack of atomic directory checkins, but if they don't need them or they have already a system in place which may even better tie with their development/release style than any generic VCS could, why bother?

> This is especially true nowadays where CVS support in modern tooling, if it even exists, is usually legacy and poorly maintained.

You make that sound as a disadvantage...