Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 21 Apr 2002 13:22:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 21 Apr 2002 13:22:05 -0400 Received: from panic.tn.gatech.edu ([130.207.137.62]:25250 "HELO gtf.org") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sun, 21 Apr 2002 13:22:04 -0400 Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 13:22:03 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik To: phillips@bonn-fries.net Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove Bitkeeper documentation from Linux tree Message-ID: <20020421132203.E4479@havoc.gtf.org> In-Reply-To: <20020421101731.D10525@work.bitmover.com> 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 Daniel Phillips wrote: > On Sunday 21 April 2002 18:57, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 06:46:11PM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > > Let's pull back a little from the proselytizing, shall we? I'll modify > > > my proposal to 'include just a pointer to the bk documentation in the > > > kernel tree itself'. This should satisfy everybody. > > > > No, it doesn't. It was put into the tree for convenience. > > How much less convenient is it to click on a link? So much harder that it's > worth pissing off some key developers? Linus has already explained why he put it into the kernel sources. And, who are these key developers you are speaking for? > > It therefore stands to reason that removing it creates inconvenience. > > Further, the only reason to remove it is ideology. i.e. something > > other than technical merit. So your proposal is still a no-go. > > According to you, yes. I'll leave it on the table. Linus has already explained he isn't applying your patch. 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/