Re: BK, deltas, snapshots and fate of -pre...

Larry McVoy (lm@bitmover.com)
Mon, 22 Apr 2002 10:21:43 -0700

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]

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?

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

-- 

---
Larry McVoy            	 lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitmover.com/lm 
-
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/