[lkml]   [2002]   [Apr]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] Remove Bitkeeper documentation from Linux tree
    Daniel Phillips writes:
    > On Saturday 20 April 2002 18:13, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
    > > Daniel,
    > >
    > > This is not documentation for bitkeeper but how to use bitkeeper
    > > effectively for kernel development. It happens to be DAMN USEFULL
    > > documentation at that for anyone wanting to use bitkeeper for kernel
    > > development so IMO it fully belongs in the kernel. Just like the
    > > SubmittingPatches document does, too. Or are you going to remove that as well?
    > By that logic, we should also include the lkml FAQ in the kernel
    > tree. Should we?

    No. A pointer to the lkml FAQ is sufficient.


    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:0.021 / U:15.472 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site