Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S271889AbTGRVqX (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jul 2003 17:46:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S271852AbTGRVoS (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jul 2003 17:44:18 -0400 Received: from smtp-send.myrealbox.com ([192.108.102.143]:9001 "EHLO smtp-send.myrealbox.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S271859AbTGRVnz (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jul 2003 17:43:55 -0400 Subject: Re: Bitkeeper From: "Trever L. Adams" To: Larry McVoy Cc: rms@gnu.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: <20030718210353.GB658@work.bitmover.com> References: <1058558982.2479.28.camel@aurora.localdomain> <20030718210353.GB658@work.bitmover.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1058565518.2479.37.camel@aurora.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.3 (1.4.3-3) Date: 18 Jul 2003 17:58:39 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2644 Lines: 56 On Fri, 2003-07-18 at 17:03, Larry McVoy wrote: > > McVoy, changing the protocol would be extremely stupid. > > There are problems with the current protocol which can't be fixed without > a protocol rev, problems that many of the kernel developers have asked us > to fix. Sooner or later we are going to fix them and then there will be > a protocol rev. It's possible we might do one for legal reasons but I > doubt it. I was just pointing out to Rory that if he insisted on doing > something in direct violation of our license it wouldn't do him any good > in the long run. > Ah, sorry. I was meaning the Microsoft kind of switching is stupid. You have tech reasons, great do them. Mr. McVoy, sorry about my blanket statement. You obviously weren't just acting the way I thought you were. > > McVoy, thank you for helping Linus, Cox, Miller et al scale better. As > > My pleasure. At least that part of all of this has worked out pretty > well. We still think BK is nowhere near good enough, there is a lot left > to be done. I just spent the day with one of the MySQL founders talking > about tools for doing reviews, I think those could help. It might be very > cool, for example, if there was a way to distribute the review process > and have everyone looking over code, recording notes about possible > problems, etc. Then Dave could grab an espresso, hit the web site, > look over the code he cares about, see the reviews, fix it, move on. > It's sort of "attach the bug report directly to the code" rather than > have a bug report. Don't know if it will work or not but we may try it. > Stuff like that is potentially useful and part of the reason we think > we're nowhere near done. Now that is a fantastic idea, kind of like cvs meets bugzilla in one product. I hope you are able to do it. Anyway, please, everyone either take it private with me, or leave me out of it. At this point everyone knows how I feel about the issue and why I do. All of these arguments only seem to reinforce those feelings and thoughts. RMS thank you for the good you do. Linus and all, thank you VERY much for all the good you do. Larry, thank you for your kind response. Good day to you all. Trever -- "In protocol design, perfection has been reached not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." -- RFC1925: The Twelve Networking Truths - 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/