![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 08:38:35PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > And that was NEVER the issue, even though you keep bringing it up. Again that is _the_ issue from my part, the thing that isn't remotely going to make me think to use bitkeeper. If there wasn't that clause in the licence I would probably find acceptable to use it in the meantime. But I guess I'd better go away as you ask since I feel like nobody understands why I'm not using it despite I'm trying to explain it a few times already. > The issue is that you should not complain about other peoples choices. I'm not complaining about that, I was making a suggestion to Marcelo outlighting what was possible to achieve if it was open (yeah, it's a minor thing). Larry even said what I suggested was not an optimal fix and I agree with that so I will try to fix it right. I think it was a productive suggestion after all. Andrea - If you prefer relying on open source software, check these links: rsync.kernel.org::pub/scm/linux/kernel/bkcvs/linux-2.[45]/ http://www.cobite.com/cvsps/ svn://svn.kernel.org/linux-2.[46]/trunk - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:48 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||