Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 5 Oct 2002 21:34:18 -0300 (BRT) | From | Rik van Riel <> | Subject | Re: 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/
| |