[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 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".

    > Well ok, it means that the bk using developers can work faster
    > but that is not at issue here...

    Oh I don't disagree at all. Bitkeeper is a big improvement over what
    existed before. But it is proprietary. Which other tool in the tool chain
    is proprietary?

    Heck, it's not even that proprietary. As far as I know I can still download
    the source. But... looking at those files sitting in the Documentation
    directory, it looks to me like a big old Marlbourough[TM] ad.

    > I don't see why there should be any kind of split or anything like that.
    > Everything continues as before. It's just that some developers now have a
    > much easier life...

    And some have a more difficult one. So it goes.

    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 13:22    [W:0.022 / U:41.916 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site