[lkml]   [2002]   [Apr]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Remove Bitkeeper documentation from Linux tree
On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 07:05:52PM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> On Saturday 20 April 2002 18:51, you wrote:
> > The fact that some developers use bitkeeper has no effect on other
> > developers.
> On the contrary, I think it has divided the kernel developers firmly into
> two classes: the "ins" and the "outs".

I disagree -- Andrew Morton and Al Viro don't sent patches to Linus via
BK, AFAIK, and their patches are getting in.

Another example, Jean Tourrhes (sp?), the wireless and IrDA guy. I have
agreed to become his "patch penguin", which IMHO has already translated
into less resends for Jean through my and Linus's use of BK. He sends
GNU patches, so his process is unchanged, he only sees patches _not_
getting dropped[1].

And a further counter-example (to my shame), Anton A. sent me a BK patch
during Linus's vacation, and I have not yet sent it forward, showing
that BK doesn't necessarily imply auto-approval.


[1] of course there is often a Garzik-delay :) but I don't drop patches
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 13:25    [W:0.355 / U:5.580 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site