Messages in this thread | | | From | "Petr Vandrovec" <> | Date | Mon, 22 Apr 2002 19:45:09 +0200 | Subject | Re: BK, deltas, snapshots and fate of -pre... |
| |
On 21 Apr 02 at 19:34, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > True, but I'm a contributor and so I have an interest in it. It would be > better if you didn't pursue that line of argument. > > How about the URL?
Why we have kernel tarball at all, then? Just put URLs where you can download different pieces of kernel, and we are done. You finally solved problem how to help users who do not want to download different arch subdirectories, or different drivers, as they do not need them for their hardware, and downloading them takes a precious time.
As there is definitely at least one developer who uses Bitkeeper, and as this information is seen useful at least by some people (me including), I see no reason why this information should not be part of kernel.
Otherwise we must remove ncpfs and matroxfb from the kernel immediately, as they both use proprietary protocol/interface, and there is available only one vendor on the world who provides/supports this protocol/interface (Novell resp. Matrox), and matroxfb documentation is just hidden advertising of Matrox corp. Best regards, Petr Vandrovec vandrove@vc.cvut.cz - 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/
| |