Weekly Edition
Return to the Kernel page
| |||||||||||||
Quotes of the week
A large part of kernel history is currently practically locked into
bk. bk isn't doing what I need, so naturally I'm looking for
alternatives, but I don't have the freedom to take my data and try
it with some other tool. Was that really part of the deal when bk
was introduced that I'm denied of this freedom?
-- Roman Zippel
It's exactly the same as a file system. If you put some files into
a file system does the file system creator owe you the knowledge of
how those files are maintained in the file system? Since when is
that part of the deal?
-- Larry McVoy
If you must follow this conversation, the thread can be found over here. (Log in to post comments)
Quotes of the week Posted Feb 10, 2005 2:05 UTC (Thu) by dang (guest, #310) [Link] I'm so tired of people slagging BK on lkml that I could honestly puke.
Quotes of the week Posted Feb 12, 2005 6:13 UTC (Sat) by daniel (subscriber, #3181) [Link] "I'm so tired of people slagging BK on lkml that I could honestly puke"
Too bad. It happens because Bitkeeper is a proprietary product and a significant portion of developers do not accept that and never will, for perfectly good reasons.
Quotes of the week Posted Feb 12, 2005 13:25 UTC (Sat) by pkolloch (subscriber, #21709) [Link] Well, unfortunately the usage of BK by the kernel developers has similar effects on me (and my stomach)...
The license of BK when it was adopted by Linus severely restricted the freedom of developers (aka disallowing developing competing products).
Now I wanted to have a look at the current license, I could not even find it on the web page! It only refers to the bitkeeper command which shows the license. Great. Maybe it would be nice to find about the license, before installation?
Quotes of the week Posted Feb 10, 2005 3:23 UTC (Thu) by iabervon (subscriber, #722) [Link] I was sure Linus's 'Andrew "patch-ho" Morton' quote would be the quote of the week.
Patch-ho Posted Feb 10, 2005 3:27 UTC (Thu) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] That one was in consideration. Maybe it would have been a better choice...
Patch-ho Posted Feb 10, 2005 7:09 UTC (Thu) by ctg (subscriber, #3459) [Link] "patch-ho" would have been a _far_ better choice. It's rather amusing -but also serves to contrast the differences in Linus' and Andrew's patch acceptance styles.... and it won't cause the comments section of LWN to be filled with Yet Another BK Flamewar.
Patch-ho Posted Feb 10, 2005 8:00 UTC (Thu) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link] I sure think so. It offers some good insight into the kernel development process. And it's funny. The chosen quote is just more tired whining about BK.
Quotes of the week Posted Feb 10, 2005 8:38 UTC (Thu) by zorgan (guest, #4016) [Link] Please, a link to Linus' quote! :)
Quotes of the week Posted Feb 10, 2005 16:02 UTC (Thu) by iabervon (subscriber, #722) [Link] The context is that Linus said he'd written some patches which he thought should work, but needed testing, Pavel suggested putting them in -mm, Linus asked if Andrew wanted to put it in -mm, and Andrew said "I'll take patches from anyone ;)". Someone else posted the message itself, but the thread was also pretty funny.
|
|||||||||||||