Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 6 Mar 2002 12:58:35 -0300 (BRT) | From | Rik van Riel <> | Subject | Re: Petition Against Official Endorsement of BitKeeper by Linux Maintainers |
| |
On Tue, 5 Mar 2002, The Open Source Club at The Ohio State University wrote:
> Petition Against Official Endorsement of BitKeeper by Linux Maintainers > > We, the undersigned members and officers of the Open Source Club at > the Ohio State University, are unhappy with the advocacy of the > proprietary[1] BitKeeper software for use in maintaining the Linux > kernel.
Maybe I'll take you seriously after you've written something better than bitkeeper that is free software.
Currently bitkeeper is saving kernel hackers many hours of work and is benefitting kernel development a lot.
You won't get me to stop using a good tool that is speeding up my development and saving me lots of frustration. OTOH, if you have a free software alternative to bitkeeper that comes close in functionality, I might be willing to look into it.
Until then, the choice between a not-quite-free tool and no useful tool at all is easy.
regards,
Rik -- "Linux holds advantages over the single-vendor commercial OS" -- Microsoft's "Competing with Linux" document
http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
- 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/
|  |