Re: kernel.bkbits.net off the air

From: Andrew Walrond
Date: Wed Nov 19 2003 - 05:30:03 EST


On Wednesday 19 Nov 2003 12:38 am, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>
> Presumably because he's said several times that the bk2cvs gateway
> software is based on (and requires) the commercial version of bk. Not
> to mention that the way it generates repositories isn't really
> compatible with this model.

I was (obviously?) assuming that the bk(d) was the commercial version, but I
don't see how that would affect the client from being o/s?

And why is this different from bk2cvs? Because then I have to rsync the cvs
repo with all the problems (discussed at length in this thread) of getting a
coherent local copy of the repo.

I guess it all comes back to my wanting to host my (commercial and open-
source) public code repositories with bk, but have to guarantee 100% access
to my 'users'. 99% Isn't good enough.

I'm not, Daniel, a FSF/GPL whiner, and do not appreciate being labelled as
such.

Andrew Walrond

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/