Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S292952AbSCFQGD>; Wed, 6 Mar 2002 11:06:03 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S292939AbSCFQFx>; Wed, 6 Mar 2002 11:05:53 -0500
Received: from garrincha.netbank.com.br ([200.203.199.88]:51471 "HELO
	netbank.com.br") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id <S293634AbSCFQEo>;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 11:04:44 -0500
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 13:04:26 -0300 (BRT)
From: Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>
X-X-Sender: riel@imladris.surriel.com
To: Colin Walters <walters@debian.org>
Cc: "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: <1015368059.25841.12.camel@space-ghost>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L.0203061300500.2181-100000@imladris.surriel.com>
X-spambait: aardvark@kernelnewbies.org
X-spammeplease: aardvark@nl.linux.org
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 5 Mar 2002, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-03-05 at 17:41, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:

> > It's none of your f_cking business what we use to develop software.
>
> You apparently missed the fact that the the petition was not against the
> *use* of proprietary software at all.  In fact, we explicitly mentioned
> that everyone is free to make that choice individually.  What the
> petition is against is the *advocacy* of the proprietary BitKeeper
> software by the kernel maintainers.

I strongly object to the fact that you're trying to stop
me from advocating the best piece of source control
software that I know.

<endorsement>
I use bitkeeper because it saves me lots of time and makes
my life easier. If you don't like it, you can use something
else instead and do all the work by hand, but I prefer to
have bitkeeper do the version tracking for me.

I don't know of any product that comes close to bitkeeper,
or even of anything remotely approaching the functionality
of bitkeeper, for me there is no real alternative.
</endorsement>

Now, are you about censoring my free speech in the name of
"protecting freedom and free software" or are you going to
write free version control software with the functionality
of bitkeeper so there is a free alternative ?

regards,

Rik
-- 
"Linux holds advantages over the single-vendor commercial OS"
    -- Microsoft's "Competing with Linux" document

http://www.surriel.com/		http://distro.conectiva.com/

-
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/