Re: Warning to Debian Developers regarding BitKeeper
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002 00:30, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> This mess is not BKs fault. It is Linus' fault for picking BK to
> maintain the kernel source - now some people have to buy a license
> to use BK to develop for the kernel.
No, Linus still apparently accepts patches made by "diff -u".
Also I presume that I'll find the same result when I send in patches, that
Linus ignores them and I have to get someone else to put them into a big
patch to get them accepted.
So I expect that for me nothing has changed with BK, I still won't get my
patches directly merged. For those people who are getting their patches
accepted directly by Linus then they can apparently still use regular patches
which BK will import.
But it would be good if Linus would reconsider.
Hmm, maybe as an act of protest we should all try and find some way to help
coding on Arch or Subversion. If every Debian developer averaged a week's
coding on one of those two projects we'll have something that will kick butt
all over BK!
--
http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Reply to: