lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Oct]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: New BK License Problem?
    On Sat, 5 Oct 2002, Ulrich Drepper wrote:

    > a) me finding another route to get the latest kernel in realtime

    ftp://nl.linux.org/pub/linux/bk2patch/

    > (which still could be considered illegal since somebody else, for the
    > expressed purpose of making the result available to me, is using bk);

    Good question, does Larry have any objections to people
    exporting stuff from bitkeeper as patches and making those
    patches available for download ? ;)

    I'm pretty sure he doesn't, since Linus and Marcelo are
    doing exactly this.

    > b) the kernel developers I work with not depending on bk anymore.
    >
    > The second point is what is causing the trouble. Any team which wants
    > to use bk to synchronize the work is tainted by one single individual
    > being tainted.

    I haven't found this to be any problem at all with -rmap, I
    happily accept patches from both bitkeeper users and non-users.

    regards,

    Rik
    --
    Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH".

    http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/

    Spamtraps of the month: september@surriel.com trac@trac.org

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:29    [W:4.199 / U:0.268 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site