[lkml]   [2002]   [Mar]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [opensource] Re: Petition Against Official Endorsement of BitKeeper by Linux Maintainers
On Tue, 5 Mar 2002, Mike Fedyk wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 05:40:59PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
> > On Tue, 2002-03-05 at 17:41, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> > > It's none of your
> > > f_cking business what we use to develop software. I use a hardware
> > > American Arium logic analyzer and a proprietary Linux kernel
> > > debugger. Should people be boycotted when they use hardware
> > > analyzers to debug hardware and software with Linux.
> >
> > You apparently missed the fact that the the petition was not against the
> > *use* of proprietary software at all. In fact, we explicitly mentioned
> > that everyone is free to make that choice individually. What the
> > petition is against is the *advocacy* of the proprietary BitKeeper
> > software by the kernel maintainers.
> >
> Use is another way of advocacy. When you start using something, you get
> used to it, and when you talk to others, you end up advocating it because
> it's what you're used to, and probably other options aren't as good (to you).
> IIRC, bitkeeper, is open source. It just doesn't have a free license. I
> could be wrong(I haven't checked). If I am, someone will say so...

In addition the metadata is in the SCCS format for compatability (there
may be extra data but it's just in text format and has no equivalent on
the other source control systems)

David Lang
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 13:24    [W:0.120 / U:7.840 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site