Messages in this thread | | | From | Rob Landley <> | Subject | Re: linux-2.5.4-pre1 - bitkeeper testing | Date | Wed, 6 Feb 2002 17:19:17 -0500 |
| |
On Wednesday 06 February 2002 10:17 am, Florian Weimer wrote: > Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com> writes: > > The long-range plan, and the real payoff, comes if main developers start > > using bk too, which should make syncing a lot easier. That will take some > > time, I suspect. > > Do you think that at some point, using BitKeeper will become mandatory > for subsystem maintainers? ("mandatory" in the sense that > non-BitKeeper input is dealt with in a less timely fashion, for > example.)
The hierarchy seems to be two levels deep now. Linus doesn't accept patches from all 300 maintainers anyway, he has a group of a dozen or so lieutenants. (Andre Hedrick has to send code to Jens Axboe, for example, before Linus will take it.)
Being a lieutenant would have to require bitkeeper before simply being a maintainer would. I doubt it would ever work its way to simple developers submitting to maintainers.
(This is, of course, just my take on things...)
Rob - 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/
| |