Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 21 Apr 2002 11:35:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 21 Apr 2002 11:35:38 -0400 Received: from panic.tn.gatech.edu ([130.207.137.62]:55454 "HELO gtf.org") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sun, 21 Apr 2002 11:35:38 -0400 Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 11:35:36 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik To: Ian Molton Cc: Russell King , phillips@bonn-fries.net, ebiederm@xmission.com, torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove Bitkeeper documentation from Linux tree Message-ID: <20020421113536.D2301@havoc.gtf.org> In-Reply-To:

<20020420194851.A8051@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20020421035759.19c4bf7b.spyro@armlinux.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 03:57:59AM +0100, Ian Molton wrote: > Russell King Awoke this dragon, who will now respond: > > > But no, in your eyes, I'm just another stupid BK person who's > > contributing to the downfall of Linux, and is in the "in" club. > > I dont think Daniel claimed BK was contributing to linux downfall. Sure he did. > He said that having proprietary stuff in the kernel was a bad idea. > > We dont allow proprietary modules in the kernel, why should docs be any > different? The docs are not proprietary. Jeff - 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/