lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Mar]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Petition Against Official Endorsement of BitKeeper by Linux Maintainers
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> In article <20020306221305.GA370@elf.ucw.cz>,
> Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:
> >
> >So you basically give bk for free because it is good for you. What if
> >it will stop being good for you ten years from now?
>
> Guys, calm down.
>
> A few points:
>
> - I certainly don't require BK use of anybody. It makes my life
> simpler with some people (mainly the ones that tend to be maintainers
> of subsystems and send me lots of patches), but there are many
> developers who do NOT use BK, and it doesn't slow them down at all.
>
> For example, see the FS patches from Al Viro: the only thing that BK
> has resulted in as far as Al is concerned is that the changelogs are
> a lot better and include his email comments.
>
> And I also export my tree as regular patches, the way I always have
> (well, the actual format changed subtly, but that's purely syntactic)
>
> - If Larry turns to the dark side (or, as some would say, the "even
> darker side" ;) we're _still_ ok. The data isn't going anywhere, he
> can't close that down. We'd just have to export it into a new format.
>
> If worst comes to worst, and nobody has fixed CVS/subversion/whatever
> by then, I can even just go back to how I used to work. Nothing lost.
>
> - If people in the open-source SCM community wake up and notice that
> the current open-source SCM systems aren't cutting it, that's _good_.
> But it's absolutely NOT an excuse to use them today. Sorry. I use
> CVS at work, and I could never use it for Linux. I took a look at
> subversion, and it doesn't even come close to what I wanted.
>
> And I personally refuse to use inferior tools because of ideology. In
> fact, I will go as far as saying that making excuses for bad tools
> due to ideology is _stupid_, and people who do that think with their
> gonads, not their brains.

Does this mean you will admit kgdb into the tree?

(Sorry, I couldn't help myself :-)

-g

>
> In short: nobody requires BK of anybody else. A lot of people really
> like using it, though, and it does make some things easier. Some people
> aren't convinced - David Miller is trying it out, and I haven't heard
> all happy sounds from him about it. Others have taken to BK like fish to
> water, and you'll pry it out of their dead cold hands.
>
> The most productive thing people could do might be to just do a BK->CVS
> gateway, if you really feel like it. Or just go on and ignore the fact
> that some people are using BK - you don't actually have to ever even
> know.
>
> Linus
> -
> 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/

--
George george@mvista.com
High-res-timers: http://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/
Real time sched: http://sourceforge.net/projects/rtsched/
-
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 13:21    [W:0.191 / U:2.696 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site