[lkml]   [2002]   [Apr]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: BK, deltas, snapshots and fate of -pre...
On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 07:17:45PM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> On Monday 22 April 2002 19:10, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > Do you have a problem with moving other docs out to Websites, which are
> > describing closed-spec hardware? Such hardware (and their vendors) are
> > actively anti-open source, yet we have documents describing those, too.
[response not answering the question deleted]

Daniel, this is yet another example of you not answering the question asked.
Let's try it again. Please answer the following question, since you seem
to have elected yourself to position of license policeman:

There are number of different places in the linux kernel source tree
where there are docs/code/whatever related to non-open source features
included in the tree. Are you advocating a "cleansing" of all of these
or are you specifically targetting BitKeeper. If you are only focussed
on BitKeeper, why?

That's two questions, just answer those, nothing but those.
Larry McVoy lm at
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:0.222 / U:0.392 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site