[lkml]   [2002]   [Mar]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Petition Against Official Endorsement of BitKeeper by Linux Maintainers
    On Thu, Mar 07, 2002 at 05:39:21PM -0800, Stephen Samuel wrote:
    > note: this solution DOES NOT PRECLUDE YOU (or anybody else) FROM
    > USING BITKEEPER (or any other proprietary solution) in the privacy of
    > your office and/or home -- even if you want to do Linux development
    > with it. It's simply about what occurs in the OFFICIAL Linux kernel
    > code tree, which probably has a reasonably high proportion of people
    > who are both politically and financially sensitive to the idea of
    > being almost required to use an closed source product to work on
    > their open source 'baby'.

    Do you even know what you are talking about? It is clear you don't.

    1) You do NOT need to buy BK to use it on any open-source project,
    as long as you are willing to have the changelogs posted on the
    BK website. Since most open-source projects host their entire
    CVS repository on a public website, this isn't any additional

    2) Nobody is forcing anyone to use BK to contribute to the kernel. The
    kernel is still available as a tarball and incremental patches. Linus
    is still accepting patches in email just like he always did (or didn't,
    as the case may be).

    Cheers, Andreas
    Andreas Dilger \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto,
    \ would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?" -- Dogbert

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:24    [W:0.023 / U:70.548 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site