Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 6 Mar 2002 20:28:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 6 Mar 2002 20:28:05 -0500 Received: from mail.webmaster.com ([216.152.64.131]:59329 "EHLO shell.webmaster.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id convert rfc822-to-8bit; Wed, 6 Mar 2002 20:27:51 -0500 From: David Schwartz To: , Mike Fedyk , Colin Walters CC: "Jeff V. Merkey" , , X-Mailer: PocoMail 2.51 (1003) - Registered Version Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 17:27:46 -0800 In-Reply-To: <002f01c1c49e$874c3580$1900a8c0@sirius> Subject: Re: [opensource] Re: Petition Against Official Endorsement of BitKeeper by Linux Maintainers Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-ID: <20020307012747.AAA20283@shell.webmaster.com@whenever> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 5 Mar 2002 18:36:08 -0500, Michael Bernstein wrote: >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. What?! It's really this simple, you use the best tool for the job. Why can't we advocate the tools that really do work best. Why do we have to be a movement based upon an inflexible ideology? (Or are you just mocking the free software movement by spitting your stereotype at it?) There would be no hypocrisy whatsoever in using BitKeeper if it was honestly believed to be the best tool for the job taking the licensing restrictions into account. There would also be no hypocrisy in not using it if it was felt that the licensing restrictions were too onerous. DS - 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/