Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+akpm=40zip.com.au@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S314329AbSDVRoV>; Mon, 22 Apr 2002 13:44:21 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S314332AbSDVRoU>; Mon, 22 Apr 2002 13:44:20 -0400
Received: from dsl-213-023-039-131.arcor-ip.net ([213.23.39.131]:31645 "EHLO
	starship") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id <S314329AbSDVRoS>;
	Mon, 22 Apr 2002 13:44:18 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@bonn-fries.net>
To: Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>
Subject: Re: BK, deltas, snapshots and fate of -pre...
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 19:44:43 +0200
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2]
Cc: Jeff Garzik <garzik@havoc.gtf.org>, Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>,
        Ian Molton <spyro@armlinux.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0204202108410.10137-100000@home.transmeta.com> <E16zKy9-0001Hw-00@starship> <20020422102143.E17613@work.bitmover.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Message-Id: <E16zLOF-0001II-00@starship>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Monday 22 April 2002 19:21, Larry McVoy wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 07:17:45PM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > On Monday 22 April 2002 19:10, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > > Do you have a problem with moving other docs out to Websites, which are
> > > describing closed-spec hardware?  Such hardware (and their vendors) are
> > > actively anti-open source, yet we have documents describing those, too.
> > 
> [response not answering the question deleted]

Huh?  Are you reading the same mails I am?

As far as I can see: question about moving the jfs CVS docs out of the tree
as well, answered fully and, imho, correctly by me.

> Daniel, this is yet another example of you not answering the question asked.
> Let's try it again.  Please answer the following question, since you seem
> to have elected yourself to position of license policeman:
> 
> There are number of different places in the linux kernel source tree
> where there are docs/code/whatever related to non-open source features
> included in the tree.  Are you advocating a "cleansing" of all of these
> or are you specifically targetting BitKeeper.  If you are only focussed
> on BitKeeper, why?

Focussed on BitKeeper.  It's the license.  Simple, we can all coexist happily,
and profit from each other's endeavors, but our little commons here should not
be carrying Bitkeeper ads.

> That's two questions, just answer those, nothing but those.

<counts question marks>  Oh right, one missing.  Well I answered both
questionish things anyway.  Please let me know when you're done with your
cross examination and we can return to my question to you about the URL.

-- 
Daniel
-
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/