Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 5 Mar 2002 19:12:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 5 Mar 2002 19:12:27 -0500 Received: from monk.debian.net ([216.185.54.61]:33716 "EHLO monk.verbum.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 5 Mar 2002 19:11:37 -0500 Subject: Re: [opensource] Re: Petition Against Official Endorsement of BitKeeper by Linux Maintainers From: Colin Walters To: Alan Cox Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, opensource@cis.ohio-state.edu In-Reply-To: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Evolution/1.0 (Preview Release) Date: 05 Mar 2002 19:11:04 -0500 Message-Id: <1015373464.25855.25.camel@space-ghost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2002-03-05 at 18:58, Alan Cox wrote: > Right from the start Linus has always said he isn't going to force anyone > to use bitkeeper. End of story. If you think its free enough - use it, if > you don't (or you just think its crap software, dont use it) The petition never mentioned "force". And even if Linus (and the other core maintainers) wanted to, they couldn't *force* anyone to use BitKeeper. The issue at hand is the strong pressure the official advocacy places on the perhipheral developers. We (the signers of the petition), and others are unhappy with this. That's what the petition says. > In fact if it offends you enough to start a petition take the list of > names you get at the end and between you go write a better one under a > licence you prefer between the signatures. There are already replacements under development. - 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/