[lkml]   [2002]   [Apr]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Remove Bitkeeper documentation from Linux tree
Daniel Phillips wrote:
> On Sunday 21 April 2002 18:57, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 06:46:11PM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > > Let's pull back a little from the proselytizing, shall we? I'll modify
> > > my proposal to 'include just a pointer to the bk documentation in the
> > > kernel tree itself'. This should satisfy everybody.
> >
> > No, it doesn't. It was put into the tree for convenience.
> How much less convenient is it to click on a link? So much harder that it's
> worth pissing off some key developers?

Linus has already explained why he put it into the kernel sources.

And, who are these key developers you are speaking for?

> > It therefore stands to reason that removing it creates inconvenience.
> > Further, the only reason to remove it is ideology. i.e. something
> > other than technical merit. So your proposal is still a no-go.
> According to you, yes. I'll leave it on the table.

Linus has already explained he isn't applying your patch.


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:0.084 / U:0.024 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site