Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S261760AbTCLQht>; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 11:37:49 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S261762AbTCLQht>; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 11:37:49 -0500
Received: from gate.in-addr.de ([212.8.193.158]:11927 "EHLO mx.in-addr.de")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id <S261760AbTCLQhr>;
	Wed, 12 Mar 2003 11:37:47 -0500
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 17:47:41 +0100
From: Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb@suse.de>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] BK->CVS (real time mirror)
Message-ID: <20030312164741.GN32759@marowsky-bree.de>
References: <20030312034330.GA9324@work.bitmover.com> <20030312041621.GE563@phunnypharm.org> <20030312085517.GK811@suse.de> <20030312032614.G12806@schatzie.adilger.int> <20030312161838.GF563@phunnypharm.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20030312161838.GF563@phunnypharm.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
X-Ctuhulu: HASTUR
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1966
Lines: 42

On 2003-03-12T11:18:38,
   Ben Collins <bcollins@debian.org> said:

> Atleast SCCS is mostly ascii. Larry is talking about binary. Who knows,
> maybe even encrypted and using some unknown compression method (I'm sure
> if it's encrypted, it will be called "compression").

*sigh* However, all Larry _could_ be talking about is that he wants to replace
the SCCS format by something more powerful. Nowhere did he say that the format
would not be documented.

Granted, he also did not say that it _would_ be, but you all are jumping so
hard on him based on the assumption that it would not be without knowing that
either, so maybe you could have just written to Larry and asked?

I'm rather agnostic to the BK debate: I think it is an awesome tool, and if it
gets the job done, I am all for it. If you don't want to use it for whatever
reason, that's fine too. And asking for the Linux Kernel data to be fully
available without using a proprietary tool also makes lots of sense. I also
agree with Larry that duplicating the work done in BK in an Open Source tool
is going to take quite a while and effort: I'm not going as far as saying that
it cannot be done, because Linux itself is the best example that it _can_ be
done if people really want too. But if you want, more power to you, too.

But the 'BK and Larry are evil to the bone because it is not GPL!' crap is
annoying the hell out of me. Shut up, will you all, pretty please? And could
you please first ask/clarify, then flame?


Sincerely,
    Lars Marowsky-Br?e <lmb@suse.de>

-- 
SuSE Labs - Research & Development, SuSE Linux AG
  
"If anything can go wrong, it will." "Chance favors the prepared (mind)."
  -- Capt. Edward A. Murphy            -- Louis Pasteur
-
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/