Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 21 Apr 2002 17:15:15 +0100 | From | Russell King <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Remove Bitkeeper documentation from Linux tree |
| |
On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 06:10:12PM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote: > On Sunday 21 April 2002 17:59, Russell King wrote: > > I've been trying to get you to quantify this further. So far, all we've > > seen are half-sides of the story. Please give the full story: > > > > 1. Quantify how much discussion about GNU patches there is on LKML in > > total. > > 2. Quantify how much discussion about BK merges there is on LKML. > > I already did both, and posted the results.
Yes you did. The results were meaningless without reference to which gets into Linus' tree and which don't.
> If you want to dispute my > (unscientific) results then please repeat my survey or carry out one in > accordance with your own, presumably higher standards.
Shrug - I'm not going to waste my time trying to prove _your_ point to myself.
> Right. I made the conjecture,
Correct, and it isn't up to me to prove it.
> if you wish to verify/disprove it then feel > free. I did my share of the work already.
I therefore consider this matter inadequately proven and closed.
-- Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk) The developer of ARM Linux http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html
- 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/
| |