Re: Kernel Development Model, CVS, 2.2.0 and beyond

Wesley Morgan (morganw@engr.sc.edu)
Tue, 26 Jan 1999 20:57:35 -0500 (EST)

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Alan Cox: "Re: Strange interrupt behavior in 2.2.0(and pre)"
Previous message: Paul Duncan: "Re: Telnet on Linux machine."
Maybe in reply to: Adam Scislowicz: "Kernel Development Model, CVS, 2.2.0 and beyond"

I'm pretty sure all of this has been discussed thoroughly before. We
already have a highly advanced, very efficient system - TVS. Not only can
the Torvalds Versions System manage the kernel source, it can also care
for multiple child processes, crush the dreams of would-be kernel hackers
:) and in general do the Right Thing (tm).

Thus, TVS > CVS.

On Tue, 26 Jan 1999, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:

>
> I suggest we move to something sensible instead of CVS. Please.

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

Next message: Alan Cox: "Re: Strange interrupt behavior in 2.2.0(and pre)"
Previous message: Paul Duncan: "Re: Telnet on Linux machine."
Maybe in reply to: Adam Scislowicz: "Kernel Development Model, CVS, 2.2.0 and beyond"