Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S292846AbSCFBFq>; Tue, 5 Mar 2002 20:05:46 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S292851AbSCFBFh>; Tue, 5 Mar 2002 20:05:37 -0500
Received: from leibniz.math.psu.edu ([146.186.130.2]:17798 "EHLO math.psu.edu")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id <S292846AbSCFBFU>;
	Tue, 5 Mar 2002 20:05:20 -0500
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 20:05:05 -0500 (EST)
From: Alexander Viro <viro@math.psu.edu>
To: Michael Bernstein <bernstein.46@osu.edu>
cc: Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@matchmail.com>, Colin Walters <walters@debian.org>,
        "Jeff V. Merkey" <jmerkey@vger.timpanogas.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, opensource@cis.ohio-state.edu
Subject: Re: [opensource] Re: Petition Against Official Endorsement of
 BitKeeper by Linux Maintainers
In-Reply-To: <002f01c1c49e$874c3580$1900a8c0@sirius>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0203051946340.18755-100000@weyl.math.psu.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org



On Tue, 5 Mar 2002, Michael Bernstein wrote:

> You are basically missing the whole point of the petition.  I didn't sign it
> because I hadn't read my opensource mail in awhile, but if I had the chance
> to I would sign it now.  As a forced user of proprietary software, I can
> understand the individual needs of people for certain packages (Pro Tools
> and other audio programs in my case).  However, when a whole movement based
> on the idea of creating non-proprietary software decides to utilize
> proprietary software in order to better create free software, I feel that
> there is some hypocrisy going on.  Rather then griping about the

I don't know about "the movement", but some of us are interested in creation
of _WORKING_ software.  Free is preferable; GPL is usually tolerable; but
all that isn't worth anything is the design and code are crap.

Hypocrisy (or lunacy - take your pick) is coming from those who insist that
politically correct tools should be prefered even when they clearly suck.

If you feel that the worst problem is that non-free software exists - that's
your right.  And your problem.  IMNSHO the fact that majority of both free
and non-free software is choke-full of crap is slightly more troubling.
YMMV.

> shortcomings of CVS or various other solutions, wouldn't it be better to
> create a non-proprietary solution to the problem?

So why don't you and Colin go and do that?

BTW, bitkeeper doesn't solve the problems I have.  Ditto for CVS.  So I use
neither.  FWIW, BK is closer to what I need.  If it will ever get the things
I need right - I'll use it and damned if I'll hide that.

-
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/