Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 21 Apr 2002 13:22:03 -0400 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Remove Bitkeeper documentation from Linux tree |
| |
Daniel Phillips wrote: > On Sunday 21 April 2002 18:57, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 06:46:11PM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > > Let's pull back a little from the proselytizing, shall we? I'll modify > > > my proposal to 'include just a pointer to the bk documentation in the > > > kernel tree itself'. This should satisfy everybody. > > > > No, it doesn't. It was put into the tree for convenience. > > How much less convenient is it to click on a link? So much harder that it's > worth pissing off some key developers?
Linus has already explained why he put it into the kernel sources.
And, who are these key developers you are speaking for?
> > It therefore stands to reason that removing it creates inconvenience. > > Further, the only reason to remove it is ideology. i.e. something > > other than technical merit. So your proposal is still a no-go. > > According to you, yes. I'll leave it on the table.
Linus has already explained he isn't applying your patch.
Jeff
- 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/
| |