Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 22 Apr 2002 15:54:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 22 Apr 2002 15:54:20 -0400 Received: from nat-pool-rdu.redhat.com ([66.187.233.200]:18381 "EHLO lacrosse.corp.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 22 Apr 2002 15:54:03 -0400 Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 15:53:57 -0400 From: Doug Ledford To: Daniel Phillips Cc: Larry McVoy , Ian Molton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: BK, deltas, snapshots and fate of -pre... Message-ID: <20020422155357.B877@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Daniel Phillips , Larry McVoy , Ian Molton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To:

<20020422101750.D17613@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 On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 07:34:49PM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote: > How about a URL instead? Any objection? Yes. Why should I have to cut and paste (assuming I'm in X) or write down and transpose some URL from a file that used to contain the exact instructions I need in order to get those instructions now just to satisfy your sensitivity? (And let's not get me started on "sensitivity" and how personally I think that it's nothing more than a politically correct way of saying "I don't want to hear what you have to say so shut up" and is nothing more than another form of censorship that should be beaten out of all children until it is once and for all eliminated from this earth) So let me tell a little story for a second. I used to maintain the aic7xxx driver. In so doing, I created a web site for disseminating my patches and what not. As people would grab my patches, I would get regular (and annoying to me) questions like "how do I apply your patches", "what patch version should I grab", "how do I compile my kernel after I apply your patch," etc. So, after enough of the same question, the question itself becomes a "frequently asked question". So, I made a few docs that attempted to answer these questions and put them on my web site along side the patches themselves. These docs most generally described how the linux kernel versioning worked, how my patch versioning worked, how to select patches, how to use the patch command, etc. Now, obviously, some of this was very aic7xxx specific, but large parts of it were background knowledge that was required in order to apply that specific aic7xxx information. It made sense therefore to include that information so that the whole picture, from start to finish, was all described in one easy to access place. So, as a result, even though I could have pointed the reader to the patch man page, I didn't bother to make them read a large document full of options and possible means of screwing things up when all I really wanted them to know was "All of my patches are generated so that if you go into the top level of the linux source directory and type 'patch -p1 < patchname' then things will work properly". So, I haven't read this "BitKeeper advertisement" you have been complaining about. However, I have heard claims that it deals more specifically with how to interface your own personal BK setup with Linus than it does with usage of BK in general. If I were to sit down and read that document now, the questions I would attempt to answer would be things like A) does it describe BK in general and how to set it up for general use, or does it describe how to set BK up for a specific use related to kernel developement, B) does it describe how that setup is then integrated into a kernel patch submission process, C) is the description relevant to all BK setups (not just linux kernel setups) or is it geared specifically towards linux kernel setups, and D) would the description of BK found in the document be of general use to BK deployments in evil proprietary company "X" or would evil company "X" likely need a more general description of BK capabilities not as it is related to linux kernel development. From those questions, and possibly a few more similar ones, a person can determine if the document belongs on the BK web site, or in the linux documentation directory. Like I said, I haven't read the document. But, if I did and it turned out that it was similar to my description of how to use patch to apply my aic7xxx patches, IOW if it truly was a limited scope "How to use BK to send patches to Linus" and provided just the needed BK information to teach the user the real goal, which is how to integrate their work into Linus' BK patch process, then I would be greatly offended should the document be moved out it's appropriate location in the linux kernel documentation directory to some web site where it doesn't really belong. -- Doug Ledford 919-754-3700 x44233 Red Hat, Inc. 1801 Varsity Dr. Raleigh, NC 27606 - 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/