[lkml]   [2002]   [Apr]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] Remove Bitkeeper documentation from Linux tree
    On Saturday 20 April 2002 18:13, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
    > Daniel,
    > This is not documentation for bitkeeper but how to use bitkeeper
    > effectively for kernel development. It happens to be DAMN USEFULL
    > documentation at that for anyone wanting to use bitkeeper for kernel
    > development so IMO it fully belongs in the kernel. Just like the
    > SubmittingPatches document does, too. Or are you going to remove that as well?

    By that logic, we should also include the lkml FAQ in the kernel tree. Should

    > If you don't want to use bitkeeper you don't need to read this
    > documentation. Just ignore it and stick with what is SubmittingPatches
    > document.
    > What's your problem?

    I am worried that a creeping takeover of the Linux hitherto-successful
    development process is in progress, that concensus on this topic has not been
    achieved, and that there is a split coming. That would not be good.

    As always, what I do is in the interest of Linux and freedom. That interest
    is not served by driving a wedge firmly between two groups of Linux developers.
    I hope you understand that I am a *moderate* with respect to this issue.

    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 13:25    [W:0.030 / U:6.120 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site