Messages in this thread | | | From | Svein Ove Aas <> | Subject | Re: Bitkeeper | Date | Sat, 19 Jul 2003 00:00:37 +0200 |
| |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
fredag 18. juli 2003, 23:06, skrev Jörn Engel: > On Fri, 18 July 2003 15:51:36 -0400, Richard Stallman wrote: > > I think it would be appropriate at this point to write a free client > > that talks with Bitkeeper, and for Linux developers to start switching > > to that from Bitkeeper. At that point, McVoy will face a hard choice: > > if he carries out these threats, he risks alienating the community > > that he hopes will market Bitkeeper for him. > > I've told other people before and I'll tell you again: > Please, pretty please, leave linux-kernel for discussions about the > linux kernel and leave the bitkeeper flames for those that enjoy > electronic pyrotechnic. > > Apart from that: Larry is right. Noone cared about crappy ol' cvs > until bk came alone and showed what everyone already knew. If you > didn't have to improve cvs back then, it is still as good as it was, > so thy improve it now? Pure jealousy?
No, I think we'd improve CVS because bk came along and showed us what we already knew.
Bitkeeper *is* better, but as long as the ideas those improvements are based on don't get patented there is no reason for us not to claim them for ourselves.
Summa summarum: Having a Free CVS is good. Having a useful BitKeeper is sometimes better. Having a Free CVS with all the features of BK would be best.
- - Svein Ove Aas -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/GG4H9OlFkai3rMARAkt/AKCdvO7UCiK2AdBKZg0sSoXghmW6vgCfedcB zKSd79Dwa/ZPwijYMtR3lO0= =Xuj7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- 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/
| |