Subject: Re: Bitkeeper
From: Shawn <core@enodev.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>,
       "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0307181603340.21716-100000@chimarrao.boston.redhat.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0307181603340.21716-100000@chimarrao.boston.redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <1058560325.2662.31.camel@localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: 18 Jul 2003 15:32:06 -0500
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1200
Lines: 30

To add to this, why?

I don't mean to jump on anyone, but so long as someone can pull all the
BK data out if Larry gets unreasonable (via the active and existing SVN
or CVS gateways) who the frig cares if there's a BK clone??? If things
got nasty, pull the data and switch unceremoniously switch to SVN or
whatever.

Are there folks out there today with current SVN repos which have all
the BK metadata everyone keeps pissing on about?

On Fri, 2003-07-18 at 15:06, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jul 2003, Richard Stallman wrote:
> 
> > I think it would be appropriate at this point to write a free client
> > that talks with Bitkeeper,
> 
> Maybe.  I'll leave that decision to whomever decides to
> invest his time and/or money in implementing such software.
> 
> > and for Linux developers to start switching to that from Bitkeeper.
> 
> That would be a bit premature.  I certainly wouldn't switch
> to a piece of software that doesn't exist yet. ;)

-
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/