Messages in this thread |  | | | From | Daniel Phillips <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Remove Bitkeeper documentation from Linux tree | | Date | Fri, 19 Apr 2002 18:45:32 +0200 |
| |
On Saturday 20 April 2002 18:37, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > > > Take your closed mind elsewhere. I'm pretty sure Linus has more sense > > than to apply this patch. > > Absolutely. > > Like it or not, I personally use BK. I don't use CVS, and I don't use > subversion. > > If anybody wants to maintain his own kernel, feel free to remove the > documentation on how to interact with _me_. In such a kernel, those docs > would obviously be meaningless. > > In fact, Daniel, if you had bothered to just even grep for CVS, you would > have noticed that we've had CVS information for some other subprojects > too, because _they_ happen to use CVS. Would you argue for removal of the > CVS information in Documentation/filesystems/jfs.txt file? > > And if not, then you're a hypocritical bastard with a religious agenda.
Err, and if I to argue for it then I'm not? That's easy I argue for it. Do you think the jfs team will object?
Anyway, that was not serious, I will not argue for the removal of information on how to use CVS, and gpl'd tool, from the tree. Even though I think the tree would be better off without it. This is not an issue. A steady slide toward proprietary tools and behind-the-scenes development in cathedral-style is an issue. This is not the Linux I knew, or thought I knew, it is more like FreeBSD.
-- Daniel - 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/
|  |