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

From: Daniel Phillips (phillips@bonn-fries.net)
Date: Sun Apr 21 2002 - 13:03:05 EST

Next message: Daniel Phillips: "Re: BK, deltas, snapshots and fate of -pre..."
Previous message: Anton Altaparmakov: "Re: BK, deltas, snapshots and fate of -pre..."
In reply to: Larry McVoy: "Re: BK, deltas, snapshots and fate of -pre..."
Next in thread: Jeff Garzik: "Re: BK, deltas, snapshots and fate of -pre..."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Monday 22 April 2002 19:48, Larry McVoy wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 07:44:43PM +0200, Daniel Phillips 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.
> >
> > 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.
>
> What part of "describing closed-spec hardware" did you not understand?

There is no kernel driver for Bitkeeper. What's your point?

-- 
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/

Next message: Daniel Phillips: "Re: BK, deltas, snapshots and fate of -pre..."
Previous message: Anton Altaparmakov: "Re: BK, deltas, snapshots and fate of -pre..."
In reply to: Larry McVoy: "Re: BK, deltas, snapshots and fate of -pre..."
Next in thread: Jeff Garzik: "Re: BK, deltas, snapshots and fate of -pre..."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Apr 23 2002 - 22:00:32 EST